State Responsibility for Targeted Killings By Drones: An Analysis Through The Lens of Ihl Principles

Abstract

This study analyses whether targeted killing by drones is inherently consistent with International Humanitarian Law (IHL) principles. Despite its commonly held negative perception, this study contends that targeted killing can align with IHL. This is due to the targeted killing method of drone strikes offering the unique advantage of being in accordance with IHL principles compared to other forms of attacks. However, the use of autonomous drones poses a significant risk to IHL and is likely to violate international obligations. This study discusses that autonomous drones may be unable to analyze data accurately and extract valuable insights. This could cause them to face difficulties in maintaining the necessary balance between civilian harm and anticipated military advantage. As a result, it is argued that autonomous drones are unable to adhere to the IHL principles, particularly the principle of proportionality. The study examines the attribution issue of autonomous drones and proposes that they should be regarded as agents of the State, making their actions attributable to the State.

Bu çalışma, insansız hava araçlarıyla gerçekleştirilen hedef alarak öldürmenin özü itibarıyla Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukuk (UİH) ilkeleriyle tutarlı olup olmadığını incelemektedir. Yaygın olarak kabul edilen olumsuz algıya rağmen bu çalışma, hedef alarak öldürmenin UİH ile uyumlu olabileceğini ileri sürmektedir. Bunun nedeni, hedef alarak öldürmenin, diğer saldırı türlerine kıyasla UİH ilkelerine uygun olabilme hususunda benzersiz avantajlar sunmasıdır.