نویسندگان

1 استادیار دانشگاه حضرت معصومه (س)، قم، ایران

2 دانشجوی دکتری، مدرس دانشگاه

چکیده

پیشرفت فناوری در قرن 21 در حال رونمایی از شکل دیگری از سلاح‌‌های پرندۀ نظامی است که هواپیماهای بدون سرنشین مصداق بارز آن‌ها به شمار می‌روند. نظر به اینکه کاربرد این نوع از سیستم‌‌های هوابرد چالش‌‌های جدی را از منظر حقوق بین‌‌الملل بشردوستانه موجب شده است، ارزیابی مستقل حقوقی در این خصوص ضروری است. پیش از بررسی دقیق این مسئله شناخت این سیستم‌‌ها و بررسی چالش‌‌های ناشی از به‌کارگیری آن‌ها در مخاصمات مسلحانه ضروری است. مقالۀ حاضر با طرح چالش‌‌ها و ابهامات ناشی از به‌کارگیری این سیستم‌‌های نوظهور در مخاصمات مسلحانه تلاش دارد عملکرد هواپیماهای بدون سرنشین در مخاصمات مسلحانه را براساس قواعد پایه‌‌ای حقوق بین‌‌الملل بشردوستانه نظیر اصل تفکیک، تناسب و اقدامات احتیاطی ارزیابی حقوقی کند. در این ارزیابی نشان داده می‌‌شود که کاربرد این سیستم‌‌ها در موارد متعددی ناقض قواعد بنیادین حقوق بین‌‌الملل بشردوستانه بوده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Contemplating the legitimacy of using drones in armed conflict from perspective of international humanitarian law

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyyed Hesamoddin Lesani 1
  • Mahvash Monfared 2

1 Assistant Professor, Hazrate Masoumeh University, Qom, Iran

2 PhD Student in Public International Law, Tehran University. Iran

چکیده [English]

Technology progress in 21st century has led to invention of flying war crafts that Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (hereinafter UAVs or drones) are a clear example. Regarding the fact that such War crafts have created challenges in the context of international Humanitarian Law (hereinafter IHL), independent legal assessment on the issue seems necessary. It is necessary to study and get familiar with challenges in deploying such war crafts in armed conflicts. This paper, studies existing ambiguities and challenges in deploying such technologies in armed conflicts, and assesses the function of UAVs in armed conflict under IHL's fundamental principles like principle of Distinction, Proportionality and precautionary principle in conducting attacks.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Distinction Principle
  • International Humanitarian law
  • Precautionary Principle
  • Proportionality Principle
  • Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

الف) فارسی

ساعد، نادر (1387). حقوق بشردوستانه و مسائل نوظهور، تهران: خرسندی.

فلک، دیتر (1391). حقوق بشردوستانه در مخاصمات مسلحانه، ترجمۀ قاسم زمانی و نادر ساعد، تهران: شهر دانش.

هنکرتز، ژان ماری و دوسوالدبک، لوئیس (1387). حقوق بین‌الملل بشردوستانۀ عرفی، تهران: مجد.

تقی‌‌زاده زکیه و هداوند، فاطمه (1391). «کاووشی در مشروعیت استفاده از هواپیماهای بدون سرنشین در حقوق بین‌‌الملل»، فصلنامۀ مطالعات بین‌‌المللی، سال نهم، شمارۀ 3.

علیپور، عباس و کرمی‌‌ناوه‌‌کش، محسن (1393). «واکاوی نقش هواپیماهای بدون سرنشین در عملیات ضد تروریستی (با تأکید بر کشور یمن)»، فصلنامۀ تحقیقات سیاسی بین‌‌المللی، شمارۀ هجدهم.

علاقه‌‌بند‌حسینی، یونس و یزدان‌نجات، رزا (1391). «گسترش استفاده از هواپیماهای بدون سرنشین در آیینۀ حقوق توسل به زور و مخاصمات مسلحانه»، مجلۀ حقوقی بین‌‌المللی، سال سی‌‌ام، شمارۀ 48.

ب) انگلیسی

A. Books

  1. Gill, T. D., & Fleck, D. “The Handbook of The International Law of Military Operations”. Oxford: OUP,Hague Convention (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land and Its Annex: Regulations Concerning theLaws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 29 July 1899. (Cited as: Hague Convention II), (2010).
  2. Henderson, I, Air and Missile Warfare,martinus nijhoff publishers, Review 49/1-2, (2010).
  3. Kalshoven, F., & Zegveld, L. “Constraints on the Waging of War: An Introduction to International HumanitarianLaw”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (2011).
  4. Singer, P. W, The Robotic Revolution and Conflict in the Twenty first Century, New York,  Penguin group USA, (2009).
  5. Walzer, M,Just war and Unjust  wars: Amoral Argument With Historical Illustrations,  New York: Basic Books, (2006).

B. Articles

  1. Anderson, K., “Rise of the Drones: Unmanned Systems and the Future of War”, U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, March 18, (2010).
  2. Boyle, M. j., ” The costs and consequences of drone warfare, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, No 81, (2013).
  3. Brooke, l., “Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (drones): an introduction”, International Affairs and Defense, SN06493, 25 April (2013).
  4.  Brooks, R. “Drones and the International Rule of Law”, Journal of Ethics and International Affairs, Vol. 28, pp. 83-103, (2014).
    1. Cole, CH., "Drone War a Briefing Document”, Nexus magazine, April (2012).
    2. Corcoran, M., “Drone Journalism: Newsgathering applications of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in covering conflict, civil unrest and disaster “, International Correspondent – Australian Broadcasting Corporation,January (2014).
    3. GEISS. R,”  The International-Law Dimension of Autonomous Weapons Systems”, International Policy Analysis, (2015).
    4. Howard,S ,”Special Operations Forces And Unmanned Aerial Vehicles :Sooner or Later?”,Alabama, school of advanced Air power Studies air university Maxwell air force Base, (1995).
    5. Jack, B ., “Law and War in the Virtual Era”, The American journal of international law,Vol. 3 , (2009).
    6. Jefferson. T, “Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral, and Geopolitical Issues (Introduction)”,  School of Law Research Paper No. 2446762 , (2014).
    7. O’Connell, M. E.,  “The International Law of Drones”, ASIL Insight, Volume 14, Issue 36, Washington University Law ,November (2010).
    8. O’Connell, M. E., ”Unlawful Killing with Combat DroneA Case Study of Pakistan, 2004-2009”,Washington University Law, July (2010).
    9. Schmitt ,M., “Unmanned Combat Aircraft System and International Humanitarian law Simplifying The oft Benighted Debate”,Boston university  International Law Journal, Vol.30:595, (2012).
    10. Schmitt, M., “Autonomous Weapon Systems and International Humanitarian Law: A Reply to the Critics”, Social Science Network,  (2012).
    11. Sharkey, N., “ Grounds for Discrimination: Autonomous Robot Weapons”,Challenges of Autonomous Weapons, RUCI, October (2008).
    12. Stewart, D.,” New Technology and the Law of Armed Conflict”, international law studies, Volume 87, (2010).
    13. Thurnher,J. S., “The Law That Applies to Autonomous Weapon Systems”, American Society of Law,Volume 17, Issue 4, January 18, (2013).

C. Reports

  1. H. Koh, The Obama Administration and International Law, Remark at The  Annual Meeting of American Society of International Law, March 25, )2010(.
  2. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Ben Emmerson, UN Doc, A/68/389, 18 September (2013).
  3. Report of the Special reporter on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Philip Alston, Addendum, Study on Targeted Killings, UN Doc. A/HRC/14/24/Add.6, May 28, (2010).
  4. Report: Yemen drone strike possibly violated international law,by John Knefel, February 20. 2014.                                                                                                

D. Documents

  1. Commentary of the HPCR (Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research at Harvard University) Manual of international Law Applicable to A Us Congress National Defense Authorization, fiscal year 2001, public law.106_398ir and Missile Warfare, Version 1.2, march (2010).
  2. Convention on International Civil Aviation, Signed Chicago, on 7 December 1944 (Chicago Convention).
  3. Declaration (IV, I)  to Prohibit for The Term of Five Years, The Launching Projectiles and Explosive from Balloons and other Method of            Similar Nature, The Hegue 29 July (1899).
  4. Harvard University Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research  HPCR Manual on International Law Applicable to Air and Missile Warfare , Bern, 15 may. (2009).
    1. Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan, research by the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic of Stanford Law School (Stanford Clinic), available at:  http://www.livingunderdrones.org/report/.
    2. Protocol Additional to The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 relating to  The Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June (1977).
    3. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July (1998).
    4. Rule Concerning The Control of Wireless Telegraphy in Time of War and Air warfare Drafted by a Commission of Jurists at The Hegue, December 1992- February (1923).
      1. United Nations General AssemblyFirst Committee: Disarmament And International Security (DISEC)“Our interconnected world will make significant progress if the security, peace and stability exist for all peoples in all regions. We must intensify our efforts, as no obstacle is insurmountable.”  Ambassador Desra Percaya, Indonesia Opening Debate, (2012).

10. Contemplating the Legitimacy of Using Drones in Armed Conflict under International Humanitarian Law

  1. 11.  
  2. Unveiling the progress of technology in the 21st century has resulted to unveiling another form of bird military weapons that Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (hereinafter UAVs or drones) are a clear example. Owing to the fact that manipulating this type of airborne system has generated to considerable controversies from the perspective of international Humanitarian Law (hereinafter IHL), independent legal assessment of the issue seems necessary. Before investigating this issue, it is essential to be familiar with this system and explore those challenges arising from their employment in armed conflicts. The present paper, through proposing the existing ambiguities and challenges emerging from employing these systems in armed conflicts, is attemptingto assess the performance of UAVs in armed conflict under IHL's basic regulations as principles of Distinction, Proportionality and taking precautions in attack.
  3. Key Words: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, International Humanitarian Law, Distinction Principle, Proportionality Principle, Precautionary Principle.

E. Website

 

http://www.asil.org/insights101112.cfm.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/22/amnesty-us-officials-war-crimes-drones.

 

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2184826.

www.hrw.org/world-report/2014.

                                                                               http://internationallaw.blogfa.com/post-476.aspx

 

http://canimun.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CANIMUN-2013-GA1-Background-Guide.pdf.

 

http://canimun.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CANIMUN-2013-GA1-Background-Guide.pdf.

http://canimun.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CANIMUN-2013-GA1-Background-Guide.pdf.