| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
098319
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Continued engagement with LOAC and IHL is ongoing with the Judge Advocates
General Department taking the primary role. Its training institution in Kamptee
is at the forefront. There has been increased interaction with the ICRC since
India opened up to the ICRC in the mid nineties, after initially being defensive
with respect to Kashmir. Not only has IHL been introduced into officer and
subordinate ranks courses, but guest lectures are also organised. Increased
scope of the engagement is possible, particularly if it finds mention in the next
edition of the Army doctrine. Increasing the scope of adherence to IHL, such as
by acceding to AP I and the ICC, can be debated. Even if India remains outside,
it can be expected that it would follow the tenets as a responsible power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
107821
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
165632
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
IN THE PAST three or four years, a movement to ban "autonomous combat robots," which in Russia are called "lethal autonomous systems" (in Western literature, LAWS), has been gaining strength in the world but remains almost unnoticed in Russia. Their prohibition is being advocated by the nongovernmental organizations Stop Killer Robots, Article 36, the International Committee for Robot Arms Control; prominent business leaders like Elon Musk and Steve Wozniak; Nobel laureates; scientists and programmers working in the field of artificial intelligence; and even entire corporations. Some believe that fully autonomous weapons will not be able to comply with International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and could create confusion when it comes to identifying individuals responsible for the illegal actions of robots. Others believe that even if "terminators" could one day perform "combat functions" more precisely and judiciously than human fighters, their autonomous use must still be prohibited in the interest of the highest values of human dignity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
142310
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Military systems exploiting new technologies must meet the requirements of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), but advanced processing and networks raise problems for legal reviews. Tony Gillespie examines the engineering solutions to these challenges, especially the problems of increased system complexity and increased autonomy. He concludes that full compliance with IHL can be achieved as part of a properly planned procurement process, even for radically new technologies. This requires cross-disciplinary collaboration from the earliest concept and design stages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
085290
|
|
|