DRONE WARFARE UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIANLAW

Today, the character of war has evolved significantly. The regulations governing wartime conduct have struggled to keep pace with the technological and strategic shifts of contemporary warfare. Within this changing landscape, drones have increasingly been employed by states across blurred battlefields. Traditionally, International Humanitarian Law (IHL) has regulated the conduct of armed conflict on conventional battlefields. This paper investigates the legal loopholes and ambiguities within the IHL framework that have been strategically exploited by states in modern times to justify drone strikes. The paper evaluates three aspects. Firstly, vague definitions have allowed states to interpret conflicts differently. This creates confusion over the legal framework that applies. Similarly, states employ proxies and transnational non-state actors (NSAs) that are not fully covered by current IHL provisions. Secondly, the paper assesses the technological advancements in drones. Lastly, it examines non-kinetic operations of drones that don’t cause any physical harm. Such drones operate in the grey zone between peace and war. Consequently, all these factors have risked normalising the controversial use of force under the guise of legality. The study adopts a qualitative methodology, drawing on case studies and expert interviews. In light of this, the study ultimately recommends strengthening legal governance and ethical frameworks to ensure greater accountability in the conduct of drone warfare.