States and some organisations have expressed their views about the utility, purpose, scope and process of the legal review of weapons in various different contexts. Some of these views have been recorded domestic documents, such as military manuals on the law of armed conflict. Increasingly, however, States and organisations have articulated their positions in a range of international fora, either through written submissions or oral interventions.
This database compiles and organises publicly expressed views in relation to legal reviews, without prejudice to their relative significance or effect (for example, in terms of the development of customary international law). The database aims to comprehensively reflect the views of states but only covers the positions of a small number of selected organisations.
This database currently contains 379 positions and is continuously updated. Any corrections, or suggestions to add material, are welcome.
22 positions United States (remove filter)
2026
Statement by the United States
For example, the obligation in the 1977 Additional Protocol I mentions specific stages of the life cycle. We also think it is critical to add the word new, which is used in the 1977 Additional Protocol I. Legal reviews are conducted of new weapons. Rather …
2025
Statement by the United States
I would draw your attention to our proposals in the 24th Draft Article, proposal joined by a number of other Delegations, where we have expressed the idea that autonomous weapons systems may only to be developed such that their effects and attacks are capable of …
2024
Draft articles on autonomous weapon systems
Article 1. Preventing Autonomous Weapon Systems That, By Their Nature, Are Incapable of Use in Accordance With IHL IHL prohibits the use of an autonomous weapon system if it is of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, if it is inherently indiscriminate, …
2023
Draft articles on autonomous weapon systems
Article 1. Preventing Autonomous Weapon Systems That, By Their Nature, Are Incapable of Use in Accordance With IHL IHL prohibits the use of an autonomous weapon system if it is of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, if it is inherently indiscriminate, …
Statement by the United States (1st intervention)
We appreciate the inclusion of legal reviews as a topic on your indicative timetable. The GGE’s mandate, of course, is to consider proposals and to elaborate by consensus possible measures. We believe that legal reviews are a particularly important measure in the context of [AWS] …
Statement by the United States (2nd intervention)
This is, like our Swedish colleague, in response to your questions. Regarding the first question, my delegation agrees with what seems to be the consensus that legal reviews do not ensure compliance but are a very important measure. Regarding the second question, we do see …
Draft articles on autonomous weapon systems
Article 1: Preventing Autonomous Weapon Systems That, By Their Nature, Are Incapable of Use in Accordance With IHL IHL prohibits the use of an autonomous weapon system if it is of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, if it is inherently indiscriminate, …
2022
Principles and Good Practices on Emerging Technologies in the Area of LAWS
VIII. Good Practices Related to Human-Machine Interaction […] 26. At various stages of the life-cycle of a weapon, the following good practices related to human-machine interaction can strengthen compliance with international humanitarian law, strengthen accountability, and mitigate risks in the use of weapons systems based …
2021
Building on Chile’s proposed four elements of further work
Weapons Reviews Relevant Guiding Principles: In accordance with States’ obligations under international law, in the study, development, acquisition, or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, determination must be made whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by …
U.S. Proposals on Aspects of the Normative and Operational Framework
D. U.S. Proposals on Weapons Reviews Guidelines and good practices for militaries to consider using in conducting legal reviews of weapons systems based on emerging technologies in the area of LAWS 11. Legal advisers should be consulted regularly in the development or acquisition process as …
2020
Statement by the United States
Additionally, Guiding Principle (e) reaffirms the importance of a robust practice of conducting reviews of the legality of weapons. Such reviews are a good practice to facilitate the implemen-tation of international law applicable to weapons and their use in armed conflict, and can also help …
National Commentary by the United States
This guiding principle reaffirms the principle in Article 36 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The United States is not a party to the Additional Protocol I and does not regard Article 36 as reflecting customary law, but engages in …
2019
United States, Military Manual (Land Warfare)
Ensuring the Legality of Weapons and Weapon Systems 2-200. Under longstanding DOD policies, there are requirements to review the legality of the acquisition or procurement of weapons. Although the United States is not a party to Additional Protocol I, many allies and potential multinational partners …
Implementing International Humanitarian Law in the Use of Autonomy in Weapon Systems
12. The legal review of weapons prior to their use enables the State developing or acquiring the weapons to consider relevant IHL issues, including precautions to reduce the risk of civilian casualties. The legal review of the weapon also affords an opportunity to ensure that …
2018
Human-Machine Interaction in the Development, Deployment and Use of Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems
32. We also recommend a proactive approach in addressing issues in human-machine interaction. States seeking to develop new uses for autonomy in their weapons should be affirmatively seeking to identify and address these issues in their respective processes for managing the life cycle of such …
Statement by the United States
Although we’ve heard the message from some States that weapons reviews are not sufficient, we think further consideration by this group of weapons reviews, without prejudice to other elements of the groups’ work, would be worthwhile. The United States remains interested in sharing practice on …
Statement by the United States
The United States places great importance on the weapon review process in the development and acquisition of new weapon systems. This is a critical measure in ensuring that weapon systems can dependably be used in a manner that is consistent with IHL
2017
Autonomy in weapon systems
3. The United States of America views the review of the legality of weapons as a best practice for implementing customary and treaty law relating to weapons and their use in armed conflict. The United States of America is not a party to [AP I] …
2016
Statement by the United States
Finally, we have consistently heard in the CCW interest expressed on the weapons review process and about the requirement to conduct a legal review of all new weapon systems, including LAWS. We believe that this is an area on which we should focus as an …
2015
United States, Military Manual
6.2 DoD Policy of Reviewing the Legality of Weapons As provided in DoD issuances, DoD policy for many years has required the legal review of the intended acquisition or procurement of weapons or weapon systems; this review includes ensuring that such acquisition or procurement is …
2012
United States, International Law in Cyberspace
States should undertake a legal review of weapons, including those that employ a cyber capability. Such a review should entail an analysis, for example, of whether a particular capability would be inherently indiscriminate, i.e., that it could not be used consistent with the principles of …
2005
IHL and ERW: Response from the United States
29. The United States does have a mechanism to review the legality of new weapons. Pursuant to DOD Directives and Military Department regulations, a legal review is required for every new or modified weapon or weapons system. In 1974, the first DOD Directive on this …