Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence without Moral Restraints

Gökhan Güneysu

doi:10.20991/allazimuth.1945588

EN

Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence without Moral Restraints

Abstract

This paper aims to investigate the impact of lethal autonomous weapon systems on the ethical aspects of warfare. The fundamental stance of this inquiry is that moral deskilling is a tangible threat due to the fact that autonomous weapons will instigate a slacking-off within the military cadres, which in turn will cause the loss of military ethics over a longer period since many of those military rules are virtues normally acquired via repetition on the job practice. The minimal survival of military virtues with little substance remaining after such a moral deskilling is what is at issue, not a one-time transgression of humanitarian law.

Keywords

References

Abraham, Y. (2023, November 30). A mass assassination factory’: Inside Israel’s calculated bombing of Gaza. +972 Magazine. https://www.972mag.com/mass-assassination- factory-israel-calculated-bombing-gaza/
Abraham, Y. (2024, April 3). ‘Lavender’: The AI machine directing Israel’s bombing spree in Gaza. Balfour Declaration. https://balfourproject.org/lavender-the-ai-machine- directing-israels-bombing-spree-in-gaza/
Alwardt, C., & Schörnig, N. (2021). A necessary step back? Zeitschrift Für Friedens- Und Konfliktforschung, 10(2), 295–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42597-021-00067-z
Arai, K., & Matsumoto, M. (2023). Public perceptions of autonomous lethal weapons systems. AI and Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-023-00282-9
Bellaby,R.W.(2021).CanAIweaponsmakeethicaldecisions?CriminalJusticeEthics, 40(2), 86–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/0731129X.2021.1951459
Biggar, N. (2023). An ethic of military uses of artificial intelligence: Sustaining virtue, granting autonomy, and calibrating risk. Conatus, 8, 67–76. https://doi.org/ 10.12681/cjp.34666
Bode, I. (2024). Emergent normativity: Communities of practice, technology, and lethal autonomous weapon systems. Global Studies Quarterly, 4(1), 1-11. https:// doi.org/10.1093/isagsq/ksad073
Boothby, W. (2018). Dehumanization: Is there a legal problem under Article 36? In W. Heintschel von Heinegg, R. Frau, & T. Singer (Eds.), Dehumanization of Warfare: Legal Implications of New Weapon Technologies (pp. 21–52). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67266-3_3

Boshuijzen-van Burken, C., Spruit, S., Geijsen, T., & Fillerup, L. (2024). A values-based approach to designing military autonomous systems. Ethics and Information Technology, 26(3), 56. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10676-024-09789-z
Boyle, M. J. (2015). The legal and ethical implications of drone warfare. The International Journal of Human Rights, 19(2), 105–126. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13642987.2014.991210
Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and monopoly capital: The degradation of work in the twentieth century. Monthly Review Press.
Chapa, J. (2024). MilitaryAI ethics. Journal of Military Ethics, 23(3–4), 306–321. https:// doi.org/10.1 080/15027570.2024.2439654
Coco, A. (2023). Exploring the impact of automation bias and complacency on individual criminal responsibility for war crimes. Journal of International Criminal Justice. https://doi.org/10.1093/ jicj/mqad034
Coeckelbergh, M. (2013). Drones, information technology, and distance: Mapping the moral epistemology of remote fighting. Ethics and Information Technology, 15(2), 87–98. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10676-013-9313-6
Cohen, S. J. (2015). Breakable and unbreakable silences: Implicit dehumanization and anti- Arab prejudice in Israeli soldiers’ narratives concerning Palestinian women. International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, 12(3), 245–277. https:// doi.org/10.1002/ aps.1461
Crootof, R. (2016a). “A meaningful floor for “Meaningful Human Control”. Temple International and Comparative Law Journal, 30(1), 53–62. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2705560
Crootof, R. (2016b). War torts: Accountability for autonomous weapons. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 164, 1347–1402. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/pnlr164&i=1375
Crowston, K., & Bolici, F. (2025). Deskilling and upskilling with AI systems. Information Researchan International Electronic Journal, 30(iConf), 1009–1023. https://doi.org/ 10.47989/ir30iConf47143 deVries,B.(2023).Individualcriminalresponsibilityforautonomousweaponssystemsin International Criminal Law. Brill | Nijhoff.
Dinstein, Y., & Dahl, A. W. (2020). Section III: Remote and autonomous weapons. In Y. Dinstein & A. W.Dahl(Eds.),OsloManualonSelectTopicsoftheLawofArmed Conflict: Rules and Commentary (pp. 31–42). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39169-0_3
Draft Articles on Autonomous Weapon Systems – Prohibitions and Other Regulatory Measures on the Basis of International Humanitarian Law (“IHL”) Submitted by Australia, Canada, Estonia, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Republic of Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States, CCW/GGE.1/2024/WP.10 (2024).
Emery, J. R. (2021). Algorithms, AI, and ethics of war. Peace Review, 33(2), 205–212. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/10402659.2021.1998749 Frølich, M., & Mansouri, M. (2021, April 18). Ethical dynamics of autonomous weapon systems. ICONS 2021:The Sixteenth International Conference on Systems, Porto, Portugal.
Goddard, K., Roudsari, A., & Wyatt, J. C. (2012). Automation bias: A systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 19(1), 121–127.https://doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000089
Grassiani, E. (2023). Instrumental morality under a gaze: Israeli soldiers’ reasoning on doing ‘Good’. In E.-H. Kramer & T. Molendijk (Eds.), Violence in Extreme Conditions: Ethical Challenges in Military Practice (pp. 59–72). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16119-3_5
Grassiani, E., & Gazit, N. (2025). Civilian ‘soft’militarism through informal education in Israel: learning to protect and connect to the land. Critical Military Studies, 11(1), 39-58. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/23337486.2024.2349365
Gray, C. H. (2025). AI, sacred violence, and war—The case of Gaza. Palgrave Macmillan Cham.
Guha, M., & Galliott, J. (2023). Autonomous systems and moral de-skilling: Beyond good and evil in the emergent battlespaces of the twenty-first century. Journal of Military Ethics, 22(1), 51–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/15027570.2023.2232623
Güneysu, G. (2022). Otonom silah sistemleri: Bir uluslararası hukuk incelemesi. Nisan Kitapevi. Güneysu, G. (2024). Lethal autonomous weapon systems and automation bias. Yuridika, 39(3), 395– 424. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5343244
Haner, J., & Garcia, D. (2019). The Artificial intelligence arms race: Trends and world leaders in autonomous weapons development. Global Policy, 10(3), 331–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12713
Heller, K. J. (2013). ‘One hell of a killing machine’: Signature strikes and international law.Journalof International Criminal Justice, 11(1), 89–119. https://doi.org/10.1093/ jicj/mqs093
Herzfeld, N. (2022). Can lethal autonomous weapons be just? Journal of Moral Theology, 11(Special Issue 1), 70–86. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.55476/001c.34124
Heuser, S., Steil, J., & Salloch, S. (2025). AI ethics beyond principles: Strengthening the life-world perspective.ScienceandEngineeringEthics,31(1),7.https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11948-025-00530-7 Hovd, S. N. (2023). Tools of war and virtue–Institutional structures as a source of ethical deskilling. Frontiers in Big Data, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2022.1019293
Huseynova, F. (2024). Addressing deskilling as a result of human-AI augmentation in the workplace. 7thConferenceonTechnologyEthics(TETHICS2024),Tampere,Finland.
Johnson, J. (2024). Finding AI faces in the moon and armies in the clouds: anthropomorphising artificial intelligence in military human-machine interactions. Global Society, 38(1), 67-82. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13600826.2023.2205444
Kelman, H. G. (1973). Violence without moral restraint: Reflections on the dehumanization of victims and victimizers. Journal of Social Issues, 29(4), 25–61. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1973. tb00102.x
Kim, J. (2025). The end of resonance and the future of human judgement in the age of AI: Ethical deskilling, abdication of responsibility, and the quest for human-centric AI governance. https:// philarchive.org/rec/KIMTEO-20
LaCroix,T., & Luccioni,A. S. (2025). Metaethical perspectives on ‘benchmarking’AI ethics. AI and Ethics, 5(4), 4029–4047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-025-00703-x
Lahmann, H. (2025). Self-determination in theage ofalgorithmic warfare. European Journal of Legal Studies, 16, 161–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4587724
Maoz, I., & McCauley, C. (2008). Threat, dehumanization, and support for retaliatory aggressive policies in asymmetric conflict. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52(1), 93–116. https://www. jstor.org/stable/27638596
Nijim, M. (2024). Gazacide: Palestinians from Refugeehood to ontological obliteration. Critical Sociology, 51(7-8), 1581-1603 https://doi.org/10.1177/08969205241286530
Poszler, F., & Lange, B. (2024). The impact of intelligent decision-support systems on humans’ ethical decision-making: A systematic literature review and an integrated framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 204, 1-19. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2024.123403
Rebera, A. P., & Wood, N. G. (2025). Virtues and rules in war: Military ethics and technologies of radical risk-reduction. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 28, 821-837. https:// doi.org/10.1007/ s10677-025-10515-x
Renic, N., & Schwarz, E. (2023). Crimes of dispassion:Autonomous weapons and the moral challenge of systematic killing. Ethics & International Affairs, 37(3), 321–343. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0892679423000291
Rinard, R. G. (1996). Technology, deskilling, and nurses: The impact of the technologically changing environment. Advances in Nursing Science, 18, 60–69. https://doi/10.1097/00012272-199606000-00008.
Rosen, B. (2023, December 15). Unhuman killings: AI and civilian harm in Gaza. Just security [Blog]. Just Security. https://www.justsecurity.org/90676/unhuman-killings-ai-and-civilian-harm-in-gaza/
Rosert, E., & Sauer, F. (2019). Prohibitingautonomous weapons: Put human dignity first. Global Policy, 10(3), 370–375. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12691
SantonideSio, F., & van den Hoven, J. (2018). Meaningful human control overautonomous systems: A philosophicalaccount. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ frobt.2018.00015
Sati, M. C. (2023). The attributability of combatant status to military ai technologies under international humanitarian law.Global Society,38(1), 122-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2023.2251509 Schwarz, E. (2021). Silicon valley goes to war. Philosophy Today, 65(3), 549–569. https:// doi. org/10.5840/philtoday2021519407
Park, S. (2020). Analysis of the positions held by countries on legal issues of lethal autonomous weapons systems and proper domestic policy direction of South Korea. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, 32(3), 393–418. https://doi.org/10.22883/ KJDA.2020.32.3.004
Spitka, T. (2023). National and international civilian protection strategies in the Israeli- Palestinian conflict (1st ed.). Palgrave Macmillan Cham.
Tzoufis, V., & Petropoulos, N. (2024). The commission of crimes using autonomous weapon systems: Issues of causation and attribution. TATuP - Zeitschrift Für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Theorie Und Praxis, 33(2), 35–41. https://doi.org/ 10.14512/tatup.33.2.35
Vallor, S. (2013). The future of military virtue: Autonomous systems and the moral deskilling of the military. 2013 5th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CYCON 2013), 1–15. https:// ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6568393
Vallor, S. (2014a). Armed robots and military virtue. In L. Floridi & M. Taddeo (Eds.), The ethics of information warfare (pp. 169–185). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04135-3_11
Vallor,S. (2014b). Moral deskilling and upskilling in a new machineage: Reflections on the ambiguous future of character. Philosophy & Technology, 28, 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-014-0156-9
Vlad, R. O., & Hardy, J. (2024). Signature strikes and the ethics of targeted killing. International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 1–29. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/08850607.2024.2382029
Wood, N. G. (2024). Regulating autonomous andAI-enabled weapon systems: The dangers of hype. AI and Ethics, 4(3), 805–817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00448-z

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

International Institutions, International Relations (Other)

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Gökhan Güneysu ^*
0000-0002-1754-953X
Türkiye

Publication Date

May 6, 2026

Submission Date

April 9, 2025

Acceptance Date

October 30, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 15 Number: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1945588

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA24MM26UG

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Güneysu, G. (2026). Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence without Moral Restraints. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1945588

AMA

1.Güneysu G. Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence without Moral Restraints. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace. 2026;15(2). doi:10.20991/allazimuth.1945588

Chicago

Güneysu, Gökhan. 2026. “Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence Without Moral Restraints”. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace 15 (2). https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1945588.

EndNote

Güneysu G (May 1, 2026) Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence without Moral Restraints. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace 15 2

IEEE

[1]G. Güneysu, “Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence without Moral Restraints”, All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, vol. 15, no. 2, May 2026, doi: 10.20991/allazimuth.1945588.

ISNAD

Güneysu, Gökhan. “Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence Without Moral Restraints”. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace 15/2 (May 1, 2026). https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1945588.

JAMA

1.Güneysu G. Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence without Moral Restraints. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace. 2026;15. doi:10.20991/allazimuth.1945588.

MLA

Güneysu, Gökhan. “Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence Without Moral Restraints”. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, vol. 15, no. 2, May 2026, doi:10.20991/allazimuth.1945588.

Vancouver

1.Gökhan Güneysu. Lethal Autonomous Weapons and the Rise of Violence without Moral Restraints. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace. 2026 May 1;15(2). doi:10.20991/allazimuth.1945588

Manuscripts submitted for consideration by the Journal must follow the style given below. The manuscripts should not be submitted simultaneously to any other publication, nor may they have been previously published elsewhere, in English. However, articles that are published previously in another language but updated or improved can be submitted. For such articles, the author(s) will be responsible for seeking the required permission for copyright.
Please note that All Azimuth only publishes original research articles. It does not publish book reviews or other review articles except by commission. We look forward to receiving submissions that offer analytical answers to research questions found in the literature. We are particularly interested in novel theorizing and conceptual articles, not to mention articles that use novel methods or seek to introduce a database or other scholarly repository that can benefit the discipline. We do not publish descriptive or historical research. Policy-oriented articles are welcome but must provide their insights through an appropriate analytical framework mindful to showcase the necessary theoretical, conceptual, and methodological heft as needed. All publications must take great care to explain their novelty and contribution to their relevant field.
Data Policy:

All authors are required to have Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for research involving human subjects. Please indicate the IRB institution and the report number on your title page.All authors are required to upload all necessary materials, such as data, code, and any other relevant documents or information required to replicate their results, to an online repository.

Style:
Papers should be written in a considerable level of academic English.
Manuscripts should be typed and double-spaced in Times New Roman font, 12 points.
Manuscripts should be submitted either as Microsoft Word document file or Open Office Writer file.
Each article must be accompanied by an abstract of approximately 200 words.
Authors are asked to propose a maximum of 5 keywords.
Submissions should not be shorter than 6,000 words, but no longer than 11,000 including footnotes and bibliography.
Authors may use any reference style for their initial submission. However, once the manuscript is accepted for publication, the final version must adhere to the 7th edition of APA style. You can access the APA manual through the following link: https://www.mendeley.com/guides/apa-citation-guide/
The section titles and subtitles in the manuscripts should be numbered. (i.e. 1. Introduction, 2. Title Xxx, 2.1. Subtitle xxx, etc.)
If there are any tables, graphs and figures, they have to be included in the submitted main text file. Graphs and figures should be in one of the usual formats, at best in PNG or BMP format; please make sure that the graphics are small enough to fit an A4 page.
The tables, graphs and figures should be numbered consecutively for each and should match the same numbering used in the text.

Ethical Guidelines
All Azimuth: A Journal of Peace and Foreign Policy adheres to the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed here.

Authorship

The corresponding author is responsible for determining and reporting the list and order of contributing authors. In the case of a collaborative submission, contributing authors must agree on appropriate credit attribution.

Originality

All Azimuth only publishes original works. While a manuscript is under consideration for publication, it cannot be submitted to another journal. Not only is it ethically unacceptable to submit the same work to multiple journals but doing so creates unnecessary work and complications for editors as well as the independent reviewers who voluntarily sacrifice their time to ensure that manuscripts are up to standard.

Plagiarism, Fraud, & Retraction

Plagiarism of any form is unacceptable. If a manuscript is discovered to have committed plagiarism or some other form of manipulation, this will result in an immediate rejection, followed by other sanctions. For already-published articles, discovery of plagiarism and other manipulations will result in the retraction of the article.
Should an article require retraction, either due to misconduct or an honest error, the article will be formally retracted as stipulated by the COPE Retraction Guidelines, which can be accessed here.

Conflict of Interest

We request authors to disclose all conflicts of interest they may have, including institutional, financial, as well as personal and academic conflicts of interest.

Informed Consent & Best Practices

All research that uses human subjects must present the approval of their Institutional Review Board (IRB). This includes research with human participants, such as interviews, surveys, and other experimental methods.

Anonymity, and accordingly the participants’ informed consent, is crucial. No researcher can infringe on the rights of their participants and must work to preserve their anonymity. All work involving such methods must state that the authors received the informed consent of their participants in their methodology section. This includes whether the participants’ consent was provided in writing or verbally. In the latter case, the author must explain, with reference to his/her IRB’s decision why this route was taken.

Publication Guidelines

All Azimuth follows a double-blind peer review process. Although processing times may vary, most manuscripts are processed by the editorial staff within two weeks, by which time the editors decide if an article is to be rejected or merits the review process. Each round of reviews may take up to 6 weeks. Manuscripts need two affirmative reviews before they can be considered for publication. Pending the suggestions by the reviewers, an article may be accepted, rejected, or require revisions. In the last case, the author(s) will be given the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript based on, and addressing, the reviewers’ comments. This process is repeated until a manuscript is decisively accepted or rejected. In the case of an inconclusive review process, the editorial board may contact additional reviewers.

Only submissions that are submitted through the Journal’s online submission form will be considered for publication.

All Azimuth is an open access journal. Once accepted for publication, manuscripts will be made available online. There are no publishing fees.

Please see the Author Guidelines for more information on preparing manuscript.