Faster Targets, Weaker Accountability? AI and the Rule of Law in
Warfare
Security and the Rule of Law
Dr. Matthys and Dr. Van Puyvelde
Crisis and Security Management
26th of March 2026
1498 words
, 2
Introduction
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming how military actors identify threats and
select targets. This concern became concrete after the bombing of the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’
school in Minab, where at least 168 civilians were killed, and AI-assisted targeting was
reportedly involved. This shift is reinforced by private technology firms that increasingly act as
defense contractors by supplying military algorithms (Gvaryahu, 2026, p. 5). Some of these
systems generate large volumes of targets at a speed no human team could replicate, altering the
scale and tempo of military decision-making.
Proponents argue that such technologies enhance operational effectiveness by enabling
armed forces to process vast quantities of intelligence data more efficiently, potentially
improving the speed and precision of military action (Nadibaidze et al., 2024, p. 8). However, the
integration of AI into targeting processes raises fundamental questions about the governance of
force under the rule of law. Core legal principles, such as necessity, proportionality, and
accountability, depend on contextual judgment, transparency, and clear attribution of
responsibility (Wilmshurst, 2021; Zhang, 2024). AI systems, by contrast, rely on probabilistic
assessments and often opaque decision processes, which may complicate the application of these
standards in practice.
This analysis argues that while AI-enabled targeting systems can enhance military
effectiveness, their current integration risks undermining accountability and weakening the legal
safeguards that structure the legitimate use of force. The analysis examines this tension by
assessing how AI affects necessity, proportionality, and accountability.
The Dilemma
The increasing integration of AI into military targeting systems has generated a
fundamental rule-of-law dilemma concerning the governance of force. Recent reporting by
Gvaryahu (2026) highlights how private technology firms are no longer merely supplying tools
but are becoming embedded within military targeting infrastructures, effectively acting as
defense contractors. This development raises the question of whether the use of force remains
subject to established legal and institutional constraints when decision-making is increasingly
shaped by algorithmic systems developed outside traditional military hierarchies.
Warfare
Security and the Rule of Law
Dr. Matthys and Dr. Van Puyvelde
Crisis and Security Management
26th of March 2026
1498 words
, 2
Introduction
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming how military actors identify threats and
select targets. This concern became concrete after the bombing of the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’
school in Minab, where at least 168 civilians were killed, and AI-assisted targeting was
reportedly involved. This shift is reinforced by private technology firms that increasingly act as
defense contractors by supplying military algorithms (Gvaryahu, 2026, p. 5). Some of these
systems generate large volumes of targets at a speed no human team could replicate, altering the
scale and tempo of military decision-making.
Proponents argue that such technologies enhance operational effectiveness by enabling
armed forces to process vast quantities of intelligence data more efficiently, potentially
improving the speed and precision of military action (Nadibaidze et al., 2024, p. 8). However, the
integration of AI into targeting processes raises fundamental questions about the governance of
force under the rule of law. Core legal principles, such as necessity, proportionality, and
accountability, depend on contextual judgment, transparency, and clear attribution of
responsibility (Wilmshurst, 2021; Zhang, 2024). AI systems, by contrast, rely on probabilistic
assessments and often opaque decision processes, which may complicate the application of these
standards in practice.
This analysis argues that while AI-enabled targeting systems can enhance military
effectiveness, their current integration risks undermining accountability and weakening the legal
safeguards that structure the legitimate use of force. The analysis examines this tension by
assessing how AI affects necessity, proportionality, and accountability.
The Dilemma
The increasing integration of AI into military targeting systems has generated a
fundamental rule-of-law dilemma concerning the governance of force. Recent reporting by
Gvaryahu (2026) highlights how private technology firms are no longer merely supplying tools
but are becoming embedded within military targeting infrastructures, effectively acting as
defense contractors. This development raises the question of whether the use of force remains
subject to established legal and institutional constraints when decision-making is increasingly
shaped by algorithmic systems developed outside traditional military hierarchies.
