Military Ethics

International regulation of autonomous weapon systems (AWS) is increasingly conceived as an exercise in risk management. This requires a shared approach for assessing the risks of AWS. This paper presents a structured approach to risk assessment and regulation for AWS, adapting a qualitative framework inspired by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It examines the interactions among key risk factors—determinants, drivers, and types—to evaluate the risk magnitude of AWS and establish risk tolerance thresholds through a risk matrix informed by (...) background knowledge of event likelihood and severity. Further, it proposes a methodology to assess community risk appetite, emphasizing that such assessments and resulting tolerance levels should be determined through deliberation in a multistakeholder forum. The paper highlights the complexities of applying risk-based regulations to AWS internationally, particularly the challenge of defining a global community for risk assessment and regulatory legitimization. (shrink)

Contemporary moral philosophy has systematically overextended moral discourse into situations of tragic necessity, generating profound conceptual confusion and psychological harm. This paper argues that morality properly applies only to actions undertaken with good intent toward reasonably foreseeable positive outcomes where harm is avoidable. Situations involving unavoidable harm constitute a distinct “tragic realm” governed by pragmatic necessity rather than moral evaluation. The persistent misapplication of moral language to tragedy exemplifies a Wittgensteinian “bewitchment” of our intelligence, which serves ideological functions—particularly in justifying (...) state violence—while inflicting moral injury on agents compelled to act within these constrained spaces. A clear distinction between the moral and the tragic realms is essential to clarify moral truth, reduce psychological harm, and expose the ideological abuses of moral language. -/- Keywords: moral philosophy, utilitarianism, structural violence, pragmatic necessity, linguistic bewitchment, tragic realm, applied ethics, trolley problem, deontology, moral luck. (shrink)

This paper systematically addresses seven major philosophical objections to the "tragic realm" thesis—the position that genuine morality operates only where benevolent intent, reasonable foreseeability of good outcomes, and avoidable harm are possible. When agents are forced into situations where foreseeable harm to innocents is unavoidable, they exit the moral realm and enter the tragic realm of pragmatic necessity. Critics have raised concerns about quietism, boundary problems, moral residue, historical restraints, infinite regress, motivational adequacy, and consistency with ordinary moral intuitions. I (...) demonstrate that each objection either misunderstands the thesis, relies on the very confusions the thesis aims to dissolve, or actually confirms rather than undermines the central argument. The separatist framework emerges not merely intact but strengthened through dialectical examination. Keywords: moral separatism, tragic realm, applied ethics, moral injury, structural violence, just war theory, moral luck, agent-regret, Pragmatic necessity, moral overextension . (shrink)

Academics working on military ethics and serving military personnel rarely have opportunities to talk to each other in ways that can inform and illuminate their respective experiences and approaches to the ethics of war. The workshop from which this paper evolved was a rare opportunity to remedy this problem. Our conversations about First Lieutenant (1LT) Portis’s experiences in combat provided a unique chance to explore questions about the relationship between oversight, accountability, and the idea of moral risk in military operations. (...) In this paper, we outline a particular experience of 1LT Portis’s that formed the basis of our discussions, before elucidating the ethical issues this experience raised. In particular, we see 1LT Portis’s experience as, first, illustrative of the problem of moral risk – when military personnel are placed in situations of moral temptation. The problem of moral risk, we propose, is best understood through the framework of the military’s duty of care. Second, we see his experience as highlighting tensions within the dominant moralized warrior model of the military profession. What we call a toxic warrior identity — a distorted form of the moralized warrior identity — can negatively affect the attitudes of military personnel toward rules, policies, procedures, and accountability mechanisms, particularly in relation to non-combat related roles and duties and when leaders must choose between competing bureaucratic demands. We see 1LT Portis’s experience as illustrative of these tensions, yet his experiences also highlight important concerns about the impact of increasing bureaucratic demands on military functioning. In the conclusion, we address the need to balance concerns about toxic warrior identity with legitimate criticisms of overly demanding bureaucracy and suggest avenues for further research on this issue. (shrink)

Recently criticisms against autonomous weapons were presented in a video in which an AI-powered drone kills a person. However, some said that this video is a distraction from the real risk of AI—the risk of unlimitedly self-improving AI systems. In this article, we analyze arguments from both sides and turn them into conditions. The following conditions are identified as leading to autonomous weapons becoming a global catastrophic risk: 1) Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) development is delayed relative to progress in narrow (...) AI and manufacturing. 2) The potential for very cheap manufacture of drones, with prices below 1 USD each. 3) Anti-drone defense capabilities lagging offensive development. 4) Special global military posture encouraging development of drone swarms as a strategic offensive weapon, able to kill civilians. We conclude that while it is unlikely that drone swarms alone will become existential risk, lethal autonomous weapons could contribute to civilizational collapse in case of new world war. (shrink)

In international law and the ethics of war, there are a variety of actions which are seen as particularly problematic and presumed to be always or inherently wrong, or in need of some overwhelmingly strong justification to override the presumption against them. One of these actions is assassination, in particular, assassination of heads of state. In this essay I argue that the presumption against assassination is incorrect. In particular, I argue that if in a given scenario war is justified, then (...) assassination of the enemy state's leader is also justified, and in fact ought to be pursued as a means short of war. I defend this position on both consequential and deontic grounds, arguing that assassination is both more discriminate than war and serves to harm only those most responsible for the situation which justifies war in the first place. I conclude by arguing that a norm of assassination, far from being a destabilizing force, as some have argued, would in fact serve to reinforce international norms of rights and respect for persons by making clear that tyrants and would-be oppressors cannot hide behind military forces or notions of sovereignty to protect themselves from judgment and retribution. (shrink)

in Scott Gates and Simon Reich, eds., Building Knowledge About Children in Armed Conflict (forthcoming in the University of Pittsburgh’s Ridgway/Ford security studies series).

The May Coup, carried out in Poland by Marshal Józef Piłsudski, overthrew the elected officials of the government. Piłsudski removed the government by force but chose not to impose traditional dictatorship and declined the presidency. However, he was considered the power behind the throne until his death. The May Coup differed from other earlier Polish coups. Its presumed goal was the rebirth of the soul of the nation. This article tests this thesis by exploring the ideological and military backgrounds of (...) the May Coup. Although it cannot be denied that Piłsudski relied on force and guided democracy himself after the coup, I argue that focusing on the consequences of the coup is missing the point. The point of contention is not whether the coup achieved its goal of rebirthing democracy in Poland but rather whether there was a just cause to pursue it. Hence, in the light of virtue ethics and the just war concept of legitimate authority, and based on a specific reading of the coup, namely, as a citizen's arrest of the government, I make a case that the coup was permissible from the point of view of military and political ethics. (shrink)

This small volume from Claudia Hauer results from an interesting and important intersection of her professional experiences. Trained in Classics, Hauer has spent most of her career at St. John’s Co...

I offer eight arguments against the Doctrine of Double Effect, a normative principle according to which in pursuing the good it is sometimes morally permissible to bring about some evil as a side-effect or merely foreseen consequence: the same evil would not be morally justified as an intended means or end.

A wide-ranging compendium of incisive essays, Responsibility and Restraint: James Turner Johnson and the Just War Tradition promises to be an important contribution to the just war dialogue. Writte...

George Lucas, an internationally renowned authority on military ethics, passionately and persuasively submits the argument in his latest book that military strategy must surpass the outdated Clause...

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine constitutes a poignant reminder of the enduring relevance and potential devastation associated with nuclear weapons. For decades, the possibility of such catastrophic conflict has not seemed so imminent as in the current world affairs. -/- This contribution presents a comprehensive analysis of nuclear strategy for the 21st century. By examining the evolving geostrategic landscape the talk illuminates key concepts such as nuclear posture, credible deterrence, first & second strike capabilities, flexible response, EMP , variable yield, (...) counterforce & countervalue, limited war and escalation dominance, thereby providing a nuanced understanding of the delicate balance of power in the nuclear arena in modern conflicts. Furthermore, it concentrates on the era that started with the war in Ukraine, offering insights into how recent geopolitical developments influence nuclear doctrines. -/- Through conceivable real-world scenarios, we gain perspective on the multifaceted challenges posed by newer technologies and potential escalation dynamics involving global nuclear actors. -/- Such scenarios include: -/- 1. A non-weaponised or sub-critical test within Russia to intimidate opponents into understanding Russia’s resolve and capabilities. Prior norms have restricted testing since 2000, apart from North Korea. In case of a full surface test, Russia could detonate in uninhabited areas within its own vast territory with minimal fallout. While clarifying military strength, demonstrations risk hardening resistance without incentivising surrender. -/- 2. Coercive atomic threat to compel Ukraine or its supporters to make concessions. By leveraging the spectre of nuclear warfare, Russia could expect to achieve its objectives through intimidation and fear. However, the effectiveness of such a strategy is questionable, as it may provoke a strong international response and further galvanise support for Ukraine. -/- 3. Demonstration detonation over/under the Black Sea to signal resolve without targeting Ukraine itself; possibly amidst negotiations to gain diplomatic leverage, whilst limiting human casualties to zero or causing a mild, non-destructive tsunami. -/- 4. Ukraine could decide to launch a pre-emptive strike on Russian nuclear facilities or weapons, fearing an imminent attack. Such an action would have a high risk of failure and might even provoke a nuclear retaliation from Russia. It could also lead to a broader conflict, as neighbouring countries might feel compelled to intervene. -/- 5. Limited tactical strike against Ukrainian military or infrastructure to weaken capacity and morale. Russia’s 2000+ non-strategic arsenal could target positions using short-range missiles with 0.3 – 5 kiloton yields. Objectives like crippling Kharkiv defences might create no-go zones hindering advances. However, Ukraine might maintain drone and cyber offensive capabilities regardless. -/- 6. Electromagnetic Pulse attack designed to disable critical infrastructure in Ukraine and NATO countries without radioactive fallout. This aims to hinder the war effort and economy without provoking the same conventional military response as a blast. However, an EMP attack affecting NATO shall still be considered an act of war warranting retaliation. -/- 7. A weapon could be deployed accidentally or without proper authorisation. This could occur due to a technical malfunction, miscommunication, human error, or the actions of rogue elements. The consequences of such an event could be catastrophic, leading to a rapid escalation of the conflict and potentially triggering a global crisis. -/- 8. Sub-strategic offensive targeting NATO in the European theatre, so as to fracture allied resolve, against arms routes in Poland, Baltic stockpiles, British naval bases, American troop concentrations in Germany etc. Putin may perceive defeat or deposition as an existential threat, viewing such an option as self-preservation despite adverse consequences. -/- . (shrink)

On December 3, 2015, the Pentagon announced a new policy of integrating women into every area of combat activity, including Special Forces and the infantry, a debate which has recently been reopened. I identify two kinds of arguments in favor of women in ground combat: those that rest on principles of distributive justice and those that rest on principles of a woman’s right to live autonomously. The proposed policy (and de facto practice of having women deployed in so-called support roles) (...) is ethically problematic in ways that, to my knowledge, have not yet been discussed. In this article, I argue from a feminist perspective that the policy is morally troubling. After criticizing the justice and autonomy arguments, respectively, I raise two metaethical points about rights and obligations that underlie my objections. (shrink)

Cian O’Driscoll’s Victory: The Triumph and Tragedy of Just War covers a vast range of materials, discussing the idea of victory and its relationship to just war theory. The idea of victory raises s...

Virtue ethics seems to be intertwined to the very fabric of Marine Corps leadership development, yet I have not seen it referred to by name in any doctrinal publication or formal schoolhouse curriculum. It permeates everything from our Leadership Traits to the NCO Creed, yet I have not seen virtue ethics given the credit it is due. I argue that because we regularly quote military strategists, cite military commanders from all of human history, and rightly use real life leadership examples (...) in much of our Professional Military Education we should also give virtue ethics a formal place in the Marine Corps leadership lexicon. (shrink)

Advances in AI are powering increasingly precise and widespread computational propaganda, posing serious threats to national security. The military and intelligence communities are starting to discuss ways to engage in this space, but the path forward is still unclear. These developments raise pressing ethical questions, about which existing ethics frameworks are silent. Understanding these challenges through the lens of “cognitive security,” we argue, offers a promising approach.

Suppose soldiers invade your community, murder your loved ones, burn homes, and commit unspeakable atrocities without hesitation. As you still struggle to comprehend the horror, you are told that your attackers should not be blamed, for they, too, are victims—of war’s psychological toll, which has stripped them of the clarity necessary for moral agency. According to John Doris and Dominic Murphy (2007), war impairs soldiers to such an extent that their actions, though horrific, are not fully their own. Conditioned by (...) combat stressors and rendered morally blind, such soldiers should not be blamed for the atrocities they commit. This paper challenges that conclusion. I argue that Doris and Murphy’s framework dissolves responsibility precisely when it is most appropriate—when the atrocities unfold. Their account shifts focus away from victims and onto perpetrators, treating soldiers as passive instruments of circumstance rather than as moral agents. First, I challenge their claim that war erases moral agency, demonstrating that even in combat, soldiers exhibit moral selectivity. Second, I argue that their framework erases the victim’s perspective, prioritizing the wrongdoer’s cognitive state over the reality of those they harm. Third, I point the flaws in their distinction between excusing conditions and unjustified exemptions. (shrink)

Respect for human dignity is frequently considered the final argument against developing and deploying Autonomous Weapon Systems (AWS). This view often approaches the use of this technology on the battlefield as sheer mechanized slaughter, which is an unacceptable affront to the dignity of the fallen, civilians and combatants alike. However, arguments based on human dignity often fall short of explaining the grounds of this concept, which makes it so decisive, and the reasons why dignity would be uniquely compromised in combat (...) scenarios involving AWS while being respected in current warfare. The aim of this article is to analyze human dignity in the context of warfare, drawing on moral and political philosophy, military ethics, and philosophy of technology. In this analysis, warfare is conceived as an interpersonal relationship in which dignity is a value directly related to the determination and ability of the belligerent parties to adhere to the principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Therefore, the assessment should center on the effect of technological mediation in this relationship for which we apply the human-technology relations posited by recent postphenomenology scholarship. (shrink)

The philosophical and theological tradition of virtue ethics has long remained ambivalent toward war and peace. On the one hand, it affirms military virtues such as obedience and courage as necessary for survival in conditions of conflict. On the other hand, it upholds pacifist virtues – patience, prudence, forgiveness, tolerance, and love – that appear committed to the unconditional rejection of violence. This essay seeks to resolve that tension by identifying a higher order of virtue that emerges when we consider (...) the nature of war and the purposes guiding the exercise of virtue within it. Drawing on a Thomistic framework, I argue that military and pacifist virtues can be properly integrated only within the normative logic of just war. Yet the argument goes further: the logic of just war itself becomes intelligible only when embedded in an agonistic theory of love oriented toward the ultimate goal of peace. In this way, peace remains the final horizon, without requiring full adherence to pacifist premises. (shrink)

Armed conflicts are accompanied by serious violations of children’s rights and legitimate interests, significantly increasing their vulnerability. Although international standards and national legal frameworks assign states the primary responsibility for protecting children from war-related violence, effective protection requires continuous coordination and adaptation to rapidly changing conditions. The aim of this study is to analyse international legal instruments and national legislation governing the protection of children during armed conflict, to assess their effectiveness in Ukraine, and to evaluate their compliance with international (...) standards. The research employs methods of legal analysis, synthesis, deduction, and systematic evaluation of normative acts and enforcement mechanisms. The findings indicate that, despite the existence of comprehensive international norms and their partial incorporation into national law, significant gaps remain in implementation, coordination, and practical enforcement under wartime conditions. The study concludes that strengthening institutional cooperation, clarifying legal procedures, and improving national protective mechanisms are essential for ensuring effective child protection during armed conflict. (shrink)

Military warfare is arguably unsustainable, but can the military itself be sustainable? In Michael Klare’s 2019 book, All Hell Breaking Loose: The Pentagon’s Perspective on Climate Change, the US Army is portrayed as something of a paragon of military sustainability. Using critical review as a methodological tool, this essay problematizes this notion of military sustainability, but recognizes three lessons from Klare’s contribution. First, the Pentagon demonstrates conviction to take action for sustainability, even when its commander-in-chief offers contradiction. Second, while many (...) environmentalists continue to be regional and local, the Pentagon’s actions reinforces the science that the sustainability crisis is global. Finally, in working on mitigation, it is critical to take into account adaptation and how, for instance, the Pentagon’s actions provide grounds for reparatory justice. With these lessons, Klare must be praised for spotlighting the invisible arms of military sustainability. (shrink)

This article explores the concept of loyalty, particularly in the context of the military. In that context, loyalty is generally seen as a virtue. Outside that context, most ethicists see loyalty as a “gray” virtue at best. And not without reason: the fact that most militaries tend to stress loyalty is a cause of both unethical behavior and the cover-ups following incidents. For a better understanding of the mechanisms behind such incidents, it is helpful to distinguish between loyalty to a (...) group and loyalty to principles such as justice, as it is only the former that leads to unethical behavior and cover-ups. Regrettably, most militaries define loyalty as loyalty to the organization and colleagues. This article suggests that militaries could promote loyalty to the military profession as a feasible middle ground between morally questionable group loyalty and the perhaps too-hard-to-attain loyalty to principle. (shrink)

Just War Theory provides a foundational ethical and legal framework for evaluating the legitimacy of armed conflict. However, its application to cyberspace presents challenges rooted in the underlying assumptions of kinetic warfare that shape its traditional interpretation. Cyber operations often unfold without clear attribution, occur at high speed, and impact dual-use infrastructure where civilian and military systems intersect. These characteristics disrupt traditional applications of jus ad bellum and jus in bello, particularly the principles of legitimate authority, discrimination, proportionality, and military (...) necessity. The growing role of non-state actors, the asymmetry of cyber capabilities, and the global interdependence of digital infrastructure further complicate ethical and legal analysis. This article revisits classical just war principles and evaluates their applicability to the digital domain through contemporary case studies and legal scholarship. It proposes a Cyber Conflict Assessment Framework (CCAF) to support preliminary ethical and legal assessments of cyber operations. The framework integrates traditional just war principles with cyber-specific indicators, offering structured guidance for norm development, policy formation, and operational risk assessment. By fostering ethical coherence and legal accountability in cyberspace, the article contributes to ongoing efforts to uphold a rules-based international order in the context of modern conflict. (shrink)

Can the just side in a war for the sake of victory ignore tenets and rules of military ethics? All the way back to the beginnings of reflection about ethics, politics, and war, arguably as early as...

This article argues that extensive and sophisticated analysis of the responsibility/accountability gap in relation to Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS) occurs against a backdrop of largely ignored political and economic dynamics. Dynamics of strategic implications of the security dilemma, the inevitability of AI’s integration into military systems, and capitalist logics of profit maximisation, create, the article argues, an environment where there is “no choice” other than to develop and deploy such systems. Consequently, in the absence of choice, political responsibility for (...) developing and deploying LAWS is drastically curtailed or even removed. This explains why remaining debates about responsibility and accountability have narrowed to the use of such systems, focusing on the points of target identification, selection, and engagement. Even here, however, the implications of these dynamics shape how analysis of the responsibility/accountability gap has developed, narrowing attention to increasingly technical and procedural questions of compliance with rules of engagement, a utilitarian version of core international humanitarian law principles of discrimination and proportionality, and prioritisation of mission success. This follows existing practice as concerns uncrewed aerial systems. The article therefore argues for a broadening of perspective to fully recognise the range and extent of ethical issues that LAWS present. (shrink)

The debate over military abolitionism has focused almost exclusively on the question of the effectiveness of a nonviolent defensive system in accomplishing the valuable tasks attributed to the regular army. However, even if it were concluded that an effective nonviolent defensive system is available, there are transitional costs of adopting such a system that it is arguable whether states should bear. In this essay, I argue that states that have contributed in the past to making the world a more insecure (...) and violent place have a duty to bear the transitional costs of adopting a nonviolent defensive system. I also maintain, contrary to the standard position, that failure to comply with this transitional duty (in the so-called war-building dimension) is relevant to define what can be done in the face of certain external aggressions (in the war-making dimension). (shrink)

The predominant account of the etiology of moral injuries among Veterans and military personnel in the clinical psychological and psychiatric literature construes morality as inherent in belief structures. This supports the conceptualization of moral injuries as intrapsychic phenomena resulting from exposure to high-stakes events in which fixed beliefs are contravened in ways that result in psychological harms, including maladaptive beliefs and distress. We identify several problems with this formulation and offer suggestions for modification, including greater focus on: 1) experiences rather (...) than events in identifying circumstances in which moral injuries occur, and 2) degradation of relevant relationships rather than conflicts with and among moral contents. These shifts in framing could have epidemiological salience, facilitating more robust case characterization and enabling a variety of approaches to reestablishing the moral conditions that support life affirmation. (shrink)

Current joint warfighters are no longer merely trained – in many ways, they are increasingly bioengineered. Within the contemporary warfighting paradigms, the body becomes a domain of technological inscription, where interventions collapse the boundary between therapy and enhancement, transforming organic bodies into operational platforms fortified for tactical efficiency and strategic imperatives. This transformation is not neutral; it is intentional, and thus, the warfighter becomes a node in a cybernetic network whereby the enhanced warfighter is not just more capable, but more (...) compliant, less interruptible, and increasingly interwoven with the ethics of technology. In this light, we propose a framework for military neuroethics that is attuned to the ontological realities and relational consequences of bioenhancement. It acknowledges the ideology of optimization and remains attentive to the contingencies of human involvement in the exigencies of warfighting. Cognizant of a future of conflict that is increasingly automated, it asserts that the human, while biotechnologically altered, is not obsolete; and with this recognition, this article addresses both the need for tactical advantage and the strategic imperatives for the human remaining in command and control. (shrink)

This study contributes empirical survey data to the ethical debate on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS), examining citizens’ perceptions of LAWS and analyzing the gaps in these perceptions. This study specifically focuses on Japanese citizens’ perceptions, providing valuable insights into how the Japanese public views LAWS in the context of international conflicts, particularly given Japan's unique position as a technologically advanced democracy with constitutional constraints on military capabilities. In particular, it focuses on the change in attitudes caused by the Russian (...) invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, taking advantage of the fact that the same questions were asked before the invasion (December 2021) and after (June 2022). Based on previous research, scenarios describing military operations and their consequences (likely to express awareness of ethical issues related to the use of LAWS) were created and presented in a randomized controlled experiment. Survey responses were collected, and the following results were obtained: (i) Attitudes toward the use of LAWS shifted from negative to positive during the study period. (ii) There was a clear tendency for the number of civilian casualties to influence attitudes toward the use of LAWS. (iii) There was increased awareness that LAWS could be deployed to defend the homeland. (shrink)

In 2020, the Australian Defence Force publicly released the “Report of the Inquiry into Australian Special Forces in Afghanistan” (the “Brereton Report”). Among other disturbing revelations, the report corroborated credible allegations of prisoner abuse in which new members of Australia’s elite Special Air Services Regiment (SASR) were ordered to execute prisoners to achieve their first kills, a practice known as “blooding.” Mistreatment of prisoners, while morally abhorrent, is hardly puzzling. Personality profiles that suggest a propensity for abusive behavior are represented (...) in any large population, including an army. Furthermore, war incites destructive passions that can overwhelm moral judgment, regardless of a soldier’s character. Nevertheless, we find the alleged actions in the Brereton Report puzzling. Those who serve in Australia's SASR are assessed and selected not only for physical toughness and soldiering skills but also for character traits that should militate against such atrocities. Rather than treating the practice of blooding as a simple case of prisoner abuse, we analyze the crime as three separate but mutually dependent offenses: the order to execute a prisoner, the decision to obey, and the silence of the onlookers. Our deconstruction suggests three distinct causal patterns that warrant different approaches to remediation. (shrink)

This article explores the moral risks of violating the ius ad bellum criteria of Just War Theory and the ethics of trust for states participating in an international military coalition. The article concludes that identification, evaluation, and mitigation of these risks are morally required for participation in international military coalitions. Moreover, it holds that the morality of participation in an international military coalition depends on developing and maintaining a high degree of independent decision power.

This article undertakes an examination of the escalating role assumed by Private Military Companies (PMCs) within the matrix of contemporary conflicts, positing that their proliferation—most notably the ascendancy of state-proxy models exemplified by the Wagner Group—constitutes an exploitation of a critical vacuum within the corpus of international law. Effectuated through a comparative analysis of PMC operations across Iraq, Ukraine, Syria, and Africa, this paper demonstrates the mechanisms by which such entities precipitate an erosion of state sovereignty, present a formidable challenge (...) to the tenets of international humanitarian law (IHL), and engender systemic lacunae in accountability. Our findings indicate that extant regulatory frameworks, inclusive of the Montreux Document and the International Code of Conduct (ICoCA), are possessed of an inherent insufficiency for addressing the geopolitical instrumentality characteristic of modern PMCs. The article culminates in the proposal of a binding UN Convention on Private Military and Security Activities, wherein a four-pillar governance model is outlined with the objective of re-establishing state responsibility, guaranteeing accountability, and regulating the ongoing privatization of warfare. (shrink)

This book comprises essays that focus on a range of thinkers that challenge the boundaries of the just war tradition. The ethics of war scholarship has become a rigid and highly disciplined activity, closely associated with a very particular canon of thinkers. This volume moves beyond this by presenting thinkers not typically regarded as part of that canon, but who have interesting and potentially important things to say about the ethics of war. The book presents twenty profile essays on an (...) eclectic cast of heretics, humanists, and radicals, from Epictetus to Rosa Luxemburg to Frantz Fanon and Judith Butler. The book asks whether there is a good reason for the marginalisation of these thinkers and what ethics of war scholars might benefit from engaging with them. Some of these thinkers engage directly with-to augment or criticise-the just war tradition, while others contribute to military thinking across the ages and push the boundaries of what was acceptable in war. Many proffer alternative moral frameworks regarding the legitimacy of political violence. The present volume thus invites scholars to reconsider the ethics of war in a way that challenges the standard delineation between just war theory, realism, and pacifism, and to reflect on how those positions might inform our own approach to these matters. This book will be of much interest to students of just war theory, ethics of war, war studies and International Relations. (shrink)

Decision-making in military combat operations inherently raises ethical questions, regardless of the nature of operation, the rank of the combatant making the decision, or the involvement of new technologies in the decision-making process. Special Operations Forces (SOF) are particularly exposed to ethical challenges, because they conduct combat operations in complex, ever-changing environments. In the present article, we discuss the concept of ethos in SOF units, starting with the definition of ethics within the context of combat operations. We argue that our (...) conceptual framework could provide a way to characterize ethical challenges faced by SOF members during their missions. Then, we discuss approaches that might help SOF members to develop and implement ethics-oriented strategies. We argue that the approach of care ethics may help SOF members get an enhanced awareness of situation, which could ultimately contribute to improving their decision-making under stress specifically and their ethical skills in general. (shrink)

Moral injury implies a dissonance between personal ethics and systemic constraints. No research currently exists regarding moral injury in military physicians. The purpose of this qualitative study, therefore, was to examine military medical physicians’ perceptions of moral injury in order to understand how they define and experience this phenomenon. We used a qualitative phenomenological design to interview military physicians from a variety of specialties. We coded these interviews and organized these codes into categories, which were the themes of our study. (...) These themes revealed our participants’ perceptions of moral injury: (1) inability to provide standard of care; (2) moral ambiguity of caring for foreign nationals; and (3) lasting impact. The participants described their experiences of being unable to provide adequate care for their patients due to the command hierarchy limiting their decision making or a lack of available resources. They also experienced moral ambiguity with humanitarian missions and treating enemy combatants. Overall, our study revealed that moral injury occurs in military physicians as they reconcile their morality with the scope of the military’s greater mission. (shrink)

Seventy-five years ago, when Isaac Asimov published his fixup novel I, Robot (1950) and two versions of Ray Bradbury’s short story “There Will Come Soft Rains” (1950) appeared in print, military et...

By 2050, the United States’ military anticipates being able to biomedically enhance the warfighting capacities of soldiers. These enhancements are highly invasive, and not only to the body. They are also highly invasive to the person. With these enhancements, super soldiers may lose control of their bodies and minds, sacrificing their autonomy. They could continue to sacrifice after discharge from the military. The memories of the experiences of being enhanced persist, which may continue to undermine the veteran super soldier’s autonomy. (...) This extraordinary sacrifice requires extraordinary reciprocity. I argue that one method of providing an appropriate reciprocal return is to provide veteran super soldiers with memory manipulating technologies (MMT). An antecedent requirement is thus that the military pursue research in optogenetic MMTs alongside other optogenetic research. There are numerous objections to the use of MMTs, but their administration to veteran super soldiers can evade and overcome these objections. (shrink)

Pacifist contributions to current ethics of war are often stated as alternatives to absolute pacifism. In this article, I discuss two version of this approach: “contingent pacifism” and “conditional pacifism”. I first give an account of how they might be understood, and ways in which they might be distinct from each other. My main issue, however, is with the alleged rejection of absolutism. I will argue that confusion reigns here and that this is mostly due to a conflation of, respectively, (...) the scope and the strength of moral prohibitions. I aim to provide a better understanding of what absolutism, e.g. absolute pacifism, really entails. (shrink)

Some states are planning to acquire armed drones that incorporate artificial intelligence (AI) and fly alongside inhabited aircraft. The use of drones according to this “Loyal Wingman” concept is an example of tactical human-machine teaming, and it could be militarily advantageous in future aerial warfare. Incorporating AI into the operation of a weapon system’s critical functions (selecting and engaging targets) nevertheless carries an ethical risk: that a human will be unable to exercise adequate control over the use of force and (...) unable to take responsibility for any injustice caused. To reduce this risk, one potential approach is to pursue “meaningful human control” over armed and AI-enabled drones by increasing their human supervisors’ cognitive capacity. The use of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) to achieve such an increase might be beneficial from the perspective of military ethics if it enabled faster human interventions to prevent unjust, AI-associated harms. However, as this article shows, that benefit would be outweighed by the ethical downsides of waging cyborg-drone warfare: the undermining of pilots’ hors de combat noncombatant status and of human moral agency in the use of force. (shrink)

The purpose of this article is to engage critically with the ethical and legal implications of recent developments toward integrating civilians into direct hostilities during wartime, particularly as enabled by modern technology. The case study for this article is the current War in Ukraine, with a focus on one particular aspect of the Ukrainian government’s mobilization of the whole of society to defend the sovereignty of the nation: the integration of civilians into the military targeting cycle using modern, pervasive technologies (...) such as drones and cellphones, ostensibly making civilians direct participants in hostilities. As such, this development of modern warfare potentially threatens to erode civilian protections under International Humanitarian Law (IHL) over the long term and potentially poses risks to the international legal order protecting civilians in armed conflict. It is important to note that the intent of this work is in no way aimed at critiquing or condemning the actions being taken by the Ukrainian government, nor its people, in their efforts to defend their sovereignty against a brutal, illegal Russian aggression. (shrink)