Gateway to Think Tanks
来源类型 | Report |
规范类型 | 报告 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.7249/RR1505 |
来源ID | RR-1505-MOD |
The moral component of cross-domain conflict | |
Lucia Retter; Alexandra Hall; James Black; Nathan Ryan | |
发表日期 | 2016-10-20 |
出版年 | 2016 |
页码 | 78 |
语种 | 英语 |
结论 | Existing moral frameworks have not outlived their usefulness.
There is a considerable disparity in the legal interpretations of the terms 'armed attack' and 'harm'.
There was general consensus among those consulted that there appears no moral obligation to respond 'in kind'.
Under a revisionist line of thinking, the legal definition of combatants does not sufficiently account for moral intentions of individuals involved in conflict.
|
摘要 | This study was commissioned to examine the academic debate pertaining to the moral landscape of cross-domain conflict (i.e. a conflict that spans two or more military domains). The study: considers the body of work on morality and armed conflict in the future operating environment and provides insights on the ways in which new ways of fighting may challenge traditional moral principles. ,The study considered two emerging technologies (cyber and autonomous systems) to derive practical insights on the new technologies' challenge to traditional thinking about morality. The work involved a systematic review of relevant literature, a programme of interviews and a one-day workshop with academic experts. The study finds that: the majority view among consulted experts was that existing moral frameworks and principles continue to apply; there is a considerable disparity in the legal interpretations of the terms 'armed attack' and 'harm'. Theorists generally agree that there is no particular moral barrier to responding to a non-kinetic attack — once confirmed as constituting an 'armed attack' — with kinetic force if this is considered the most appropriate course of action under the specific circumstances. Revisionist approaches to just war theory challenge the legal definition of combatants since it does not account for the moral intentions of individuals party to a conflict. Under this line of thinking, non-combatants may render themselves liable to harm if their actions infer support for an 'unjust war'. Cyber and autonomous systems were considered to present challenges to a number of the principles underpinning traditional moral and legal frameworks. |
目录 |
|
主题 | Cyber Warfare ; International Humanitarian Law ; Law of War ; Military Doctrine ; Military Strategy ; Unmanned Aerial Vehicles |
URL | https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1505.html |
来源智库 | RAND Corporation (United States) |
引用统计 | |
资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/523166 |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Lucia Retter,Alexandra Hall,James Black,et al. The moral component of cross-domain conflict. 2016. |
条目包含的文件 | ||||||
文件名称/大小 | 资源类型 | 版本类型 | 开放类型 | 使用许可 | ||
RAND_RR1505.pdf(1234KB) | 智库出版物 | 限制开放 | CC BY-NC-SA | 浏览 | ||
1566482405726.jpg(7KB) | 智库出版物 | 限制开放 | CC BY-NC-SA | ![]() 浏览 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。