Wood, Nathan G.Nathan G.Wood2026-09-032026-09-032026-03-13Texas national security review 9 (1): 52-68 (2026)https://hdl.handle.net/11420/64588Critics of autonomous weapons systems (AWS) argue that these weapons cannot reliably distinguish between legitimate targets and those protected from attack. As a result, the use of AWS seems to violate the principle of distinction under international humanitarian law (IHL), which requires that combatants “not make civilians the object of attack” and not carry out attacks that are “indiscriminate in nature.” This criticism, however, misunderstands the principle of distinction and ignores important aspects of how AWS are being developed and deployed. Critics rely on an overly broad definition of AWS, and hold these systems to a standard that is inconsistent with the principle of distinction as it is actually formulated under IHL. Despite their very real limitations, the characteristics of modern AWS in fact highlight an impressive feat of technological design, and mark a further step on our long and fitful road to making warfare a less brutal and bloody enterprise.en2576-1153202615268University of Texas presshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Autonomous Weapon SystemsThe Law of Armed ConflictInternational Humanitarian LawDistinctionMilitary EthicsSocial Sciences::355: Military SciencePhilosophy and Psychology::177: Ethics of Social RelationsSocial Sciences::340: LawJournal Article10.1353/tns.0002310.15480/882.18155