Askeri İnsan Geliştirme Teknolojileri ve Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukukun Temel İlkelerinin Yeniden Yorumlanması

Öz

Teknolojik olarak gelişmiş silahlı kuvvetler, savaşçıyı canlı bir organizma olarak geliştirmenin yollarını keşfetmeye başladı. İlgili uygulamalar onları eğitim ve ekipman gibi performansı iyileştirmenin daha geleneksel yollarından ayıran, biyomedikal insan performansının geliştirilmesi olarak adlandırılabilir. İnsan geliştirme teknolojileri, hem askeri bağlamda hem de daha geniş anlamda toplumda bir dizi etik, hukuki ve sosyal sorunu gündeme getirmektedir. Askeri bağlamda, silahlı çatışma hukuku kapsamında sorunlar ortaya çıkmaktadır. İnsan geliştirmeye kısa bir kavramsal ve teknik arka plan sağladıktan sonra, bu makale iki geniş soru sorarak insan geliştirmeyle ilgili bir dizi uluslararası insancıl hukuk sorununu ele almaktadır: İlk olarak, uluslararası insancıl hukuk savaşçıların geliştirilmesini yasaklıyor mu yoksa kısıtlıyor mu? İkincisi, eğer savaşçılar bir şekilde geliştirilirse, bunun uluslararası insancıl hukuk kapsamında ne gibi sonuçları olur?

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Askeri İnsan Geliştirme
• Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukuk
• Cenevre Sözleşmeleri

Military Human Enhancement Technologies and Reinterpretation of Fundamental Principles of International Humanitarian Law

Öz

Military human enhancement technologies can be defined as having powers beyond what is considered statistically normal for human beings. Military human enhancement technologies can be divided into three main groups: biochemical, cybernetic (or brain-machine interfaces), and prosthetic. The concepts of weapon, means of warfare, and methods of warfare will be examined to determine how military human development technologies should be classified. This classification has crucial importance for the legal review of new weapons in order to reveal whether new technologies should be banned based on three main criteria such as weapons that create unnecessary suffering, superfluous injury, and environmental harm and weapons which do not compatible with international humanitarian law principles specifically the principle of distinction, proportionality, precaution, and humanity. The main findings of this article offer an alternative approach which is an update on the Geneva Conventions instead of banning military human enhancement technologies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Military Human Enhancement
• International Humanitarian Law
• Geneva Conventions

Kaynakça

1. Akerson, D. (2014). Applying Jus in Bello Proportionality to Drone Warfare. Oregon Review of International Law, 207.
2. Arkin , R. (2010). The Case for Ethical Autonomy in Unmanned Systems. Journal of Military Ethics, 332.
3. Baxi, U. ( 2012). Human Rights in a Posthuman World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Beah, I. (2007, 01 14). The Making, and Unmaking, of a Child Soldier. International Herald Tribun, s. 33.
5. Bendovschi, A. (2015). Cyber-Attacks – Trends, Patterns and Security Countermeasures. Procedia Economics and Finance, 24.
6. Blake, D., & Imburgia, J. (2010). Bloodless Weapons? The Need to Conduct Legal Reviews of Certain Capabilities and the Implications of Defining Them as Weapons. Air Force Law Review, 159.
7. Boothby, W. (2009). Weapons and the Law of Armed Conflict. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
8. Boothby, W. (2014). The Legal Challenges of New Technologies: An Overview. H. Nasu, & R. McLaughlin içinde, New Technologies and the Law of Armed Conflict (s. 26). Berlin: Springer.

9. Caldwell, J., & Caldwell, L. (2005). Fatigue in Military Aviation: An Overview of U.S. Military-Approved Pharmacological Countermeasures. Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, 39.
10. Case Concerning the Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States) (Judgment), ICJ Rep 392 (International Court of Justice 06 27, 1986).
11. Chatterjee, A. (2013). The Ethics of Neuroenhancement. Handbook of Clinical Neurology, 323-334.
12. Coalition Investigation Board. (2002). Report: Tarnak Farms, Afghanistan. Kabul: Coalition Investigation Board.
13. Coupland , R. (1997). The SIrIUS Project - Towards a Determination of Which Weapons Cause Superfluous Injury or Unnecessary Suffering. Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross.
14. Cowling, M. (2000). The Relationship between Military Necessity and the Principle of Superfluous Injury and Unnecessary Suffering in the Law of Armed Conflict. South African Yearbook of International Law, 132.
15. Crawford, E. (2010). The Treatment of Combatants and Insurgents under the Law of Armed Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Dawson, D., & Reid , K. (1997). Fatigue, Alcohol and Performance Impairment. Nature, 235.
17. Dinniss, H. (2018). Legal Aspects of Human Enhancement Technologies. W. Boothby içinde, New Technologies and the Law in War and Peace (s. 231). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Dinniss, H., & Kleffner, J. (2016). Soldier 2.0: Military Human Enhancement and International Law. International Law Studies, 434.
19. Docherty, B. (2012). Losing Humanity The Case against Killer Robots. New York: Human Rights Watch.
20. Douglas, T. (2008). Moral Enhancement. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 231.
21. Emanuel , P., Walper, S., DiEuliis, D., Klein, N., Petro, J., & Giordano, J. (2019). Cyborg Soldier 2050: Human/Machine Fusion and the Implications for the Future of the DOD. Virginia: The United States Department of Defense.
22. Fischer , D. (2020). Human Enhancement, Transhuman Warfare and the Question: What Does It Mean to Be Human? D. Messelken, & D. Winkler içinde, Ethics of Medical Innovation, Experimentation, and Enhancement in Military and Humanitarian Contexts (s. 147-157). Berlin: Springer.
23. Friscolanti, M. (2005). Friendly Fire: The Untold Story of the U.S. Bombing that Killed Four Canadian Soldiers in Afghanistan . New Jersey: Wiley.
24. Galliott, J., Beard, M., & Lynch, S. (2016). Soldier Enhancement: Ethical Risks and Opportunities. Australian Army Journal, 7.
25. Geiss, R. (2015). The Obligation to Respect and to Ensure Respect for the Conventions. A. Clapham, P. Gaeta, & M. Sassòli içinde, The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary (s. 117). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Geiss, R., & Lahmann, H. (2021). Protection of Data in Armed Conflict. International Law Studies, 557.
27. Gill, T., & Roorda, M. (2019). Some Legal and Operational Considerations Regarding Remote Warfare: Drones and Cyber Warfare Revisited. J. Ohlin içinde, Research Handbook on Remote Warfare (s. 298-332). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
28. Greenwood, C. (1998). The Law of Weaponry at the Start of the New Millennium. L. Green , & M. Schmitt içinde, The Law of Armed Conflict: Into the Next Millennium (s. 185). Newport: Naval War College.
29. Gross, O. (2015). The New Way of War: Is There a Duty to Use Drones? Florida Law Review, 1.
30. Harper, J. (2016). How Technology Could Create Super Soldiers. National Defense, 34.
31. Henckaerts, J. M. (2017). Article 1: Respect for the Convention. P. Spoerri, & K. Dörmann içinde, Commentary on the Second Geneva Convention: Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea (s. 43). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Henlon, M. (2011, 11 17). Super Soldiers’: The Quest for the Ultimate Human Killing Machine. The Independent, s. 13.
33. Jinks, D. (2004). The Declining Significance of POW Status. Harvard International Law Journal , 368.
34. Jones, O., Marois, R., Farah, M., & Greely, H. (2013). Law and Neuroscience. The Journal of Neuroscience, 681.
35. Kolossa, S. (2019). Is There Really a Need for a New Digital Geneva Convention? Journal of International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict, 37.
36. Kosfeld, M., Heinrichs, M., Fischbacher, U., Fehr, E., & Zak, P. (2005). Oxytocin Increases Trust in Humans. Nature, 673.
37. Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Advisory Opinion) , ICJ Rep 136 (International Court of Justice 07 09, 2004).
38. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion), ICJ Rep. 226 (International Court of Justice 07 08, 1996).
39. Liivoja, R., & Chircop, L. (2018). Are Enhanced Warfighters Weapons, Means, or Methods of Warfare? International Law Studies , 94.
40. Lin, P. (2010). Ethical Blowback from Emerging Technologies. Journal of Military Ethics, 317.
41. Lin, P., Mehlman, M., & Abney, K. (2013). Enhanced Warfighters: Risk, Ethics, and Policy. Washington: The Greenwall Foundation.
42. McAllister, A. (2019). Cybernetic Enhancement of Soldiers: Conserving hors de combat Protections for Combatants under the Third Geneva Convention. Journal of Law & Cyber Warfare, 67.
43. McClelland, J. (2003). The Review of Weapons in Accordance with Article 36 of Additional Protocol I. International Review of the Red Cross, 404.
44. McDonald, A. (2008). Hors de Combat: Post-September 11 Challenges to the Rules. H. Hensel içinde, The Legitimate Use of Military Force: The Just War Tradition and the Customary Law of Armed Conflict (s. 222). Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
45. McFarland, T., & Galliot , J. (2015). A Survey of Legal and Ethical Issues Arising From the Use of Autonomous Systems by the Australian Defence Organisatio. Canberra: The Defence Science and Technology Group of The Australian Department of Defence.
46. Meron, T. (2000). The Humanization of Humanitarian Law. American Journal of International Law, 239.
47. Moreno, J. (2012). Mind Wars: Brain Science and the Military in the 21st Century. New York: Bellevue Literary Press.
48. Mulinen, F. (1987). Handbook of Law of War for Armed Forces. Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross.
49. Nagle, L. (2011). Child Soldiers and the Duty of Nations to Protect Children from Participation in Armed Conflict. Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law, 10.
50. Nasu, H., & McLaughlin, R. (2014). Introduction: Conundrum of New Technologies in the Law of Armed Conflict. H. Nasu, & R. McLaughlin içinde, New Technologies and the Law of Armed Conflict (s. 3). Berlin: Springer.
51. Nasu, H., & Sultana, S. (2019). Invisible Soldiers The Perfidy Implications of Invisibility Technology on Battlefields of the Future. E. T. Jensen, & R. Alcala içinde, The Impact of Emerging Technologies on the Law of Armed Conflict (s. 323). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
52. NATO Science and Technology Organisation. (2020). Science & Technology Trends: 2020-2040. Brussels: NATO Science and Technology Organisation.
53. Persson, I., & Savulescu, J. (2012). Unfit for the Future: The Need for Moral Enhancement. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
54. Petit, J., & Shladover, S. (2015). Potential Cyberattacks on Automated Vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 546.
55. Phillip, A. (2015, 03 03). A Paralyzed Woman Flew an F-35 Fighter Jet in a Simulator — Using Only Her Mind. The Washington Post, s. 25.
56. Pitman, R. (2002). Pilot Study of Secondary Prevention of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder with Propranolol. Biological Psychiatry, 190.
57. Polito, V., & Stevenson, R. (2019). A Systematic Study of Microdosing Psychedelic. PLoS One, 23.
58. Prosecutor v Aleksovski (Appeals Chamber), IT-9-5-14/1 (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia 03 24, 2000).
59. Prosecutor v Krnojelac (Trial Chamber) , IT-97-25 (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia 03 15, 2002).
60. Prosecutor v Miroslav Kvočka et al (Trial Judgment) , IT-98-30/1 (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia 11 02, 2001).
61. Prosecutor v Stanilav Galic (Trial Judgement and Opinion) , IT-98-29-T (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia 12 05, 2003).
62. Prosecutor v. Martic , IT-95-11-R61 (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia 03 08, 1996).
63. Public Committee against Torture in Israel v Government of Israel, HCJ 769/02 (Supreme Court of Israel 12 13, 2006).
64. Puscas, I. M. (2018). Military Human Enhancement. W. Boothby içinde, New Technologies and the Law in War and Peace (s. 192). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
65. Quinlan, M. (2004). Justifying War. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 7.
66. Romeo, M. (2017). A Puncher’s Chance: Assessing the Classification of Martial Artists’ Hands as Deadly Weapons. Jeffrey S Moorad Sports Law Journal , 23.
67. Sandoz, Y., Swinarski, C., & Zimmermann, B. (1987 ). Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross.
68. Sen, A., Akin, A., Canfield, D., Chaturvedi, A., & Craft, K. (2007). First-Generation H1 Antihistamines Found in Pilot Fatalities of Civil Aviation Accidents, 1990-2005. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 514.
69. Shereshevsky, Y. (2021). Are All Soldiers Created Equal? – On the Equal Application of the Law to Enhanced Soldiers. Virginia Journal of International Law, 303.
70. Sherman, N. (2021). The Untold War: Inside the Hearts, Minds, and Souls of Our Soldiers. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
71. Singer, P. (2009). Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution andd Conflict in the 21st Century. London: Penguin Books.
72. Solis, G. (2018). The Law of Armed Conflict International Humanitarian Law in War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
73. The Prosecutor v Kupreskic et al (Trial Judgement), IT-95-16 (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia 01 14, 2000).
74. The Royal Society. (2012). Neuroscience, Conflict and Security. London: The Royal Society Science Policy Centre.
75. The UK Ministry of Defence. (2018). Global Strategic Trends – The Future Starts Today. London: The UK Ministry of Defence.
76. Thomas, M., & Russo, M. (2007). Neurocognitive Monitors: Toward the Prevention of Cognitive Performance Decrements and Catastrophic Failures in the Operational Environment. Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, 144-152.
77. Thompson, S. (2014). Global Issues and Ethical Considerations in Human Enhancement Technologies. Hershey: IGI Global.
78. Wagner, M. (2014). The Dehumanization of International Humanitarian Law: Legal, Ethical, and Political Implications of Autonomous Weapons Systems. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 1371.
79. Weinberger, S. (2013, 01 21). Iron Man to Batman: The Future of Soldier Suits. https://www.bbc.com/: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20130121-batman-meets-iron-man-in-combat adresinden alındı