Precision Air Warfare and the Law of Armed Conflict

• Author: Christopher J. Markham - Michael N. Schmitt
• Position: First Lieutenant, United States Marine Corps; Fellow, International Law Department, United States Naval War College - Chairman, International Law Department, United States Naval War College; Honorary Professor, Exeter University (UK)
• Pages: 669-695

Precision Air Warfare Vol. 89

669

P

W

Precision Air Warfare and

the Law of Armed Conflict

Christopher J. Markham



Michael N. Schmitt**

I. INTRODUCTION

recision attacks dominate contemporary aerial warfare. The centrality of

precision operations derives not only from their military utility, but also

from the international community’s evolving expectations with respect to

the avoidance of collateral damage. As technological developments in the

field proceed apace, the emphasis on precision can only be expected to

grow.

This article examines the synergistic relationship between precision air-

strikes and the law of armed conflict. It defines precision, briefly reviews

the history of its rise to prominence in aerial warfare, examines the applica-

tion of the law of armed conflict to precision attacks and considers several

new precision weapon systems. In sum, the article explores both how the

 First Lieutenant, United States Marine Corps; Fellow, International Law Depart-

ment, United States Naval War College.

** Chairman, International Law Department, United States Naval War College; Hon-

orary Professor, Exeter University (UK). The views expressed in this article are those of

the authors in their personal capacity.

International Law Studies 2013

670

law of armed conflict governs the use of precision capabilities and how ad-

vances in precision capabilities are likely to shape the law of armed conflict.

II. THE DEFINITION OF “PRECISION” AND A BRIEF HISTORY

A. “Precision” Defined

“Precision” refers to the “ability to locate and identify a target, strike it ac-

curately in a timely fashion, and determine whether desired effects have

been achieved or restrike is needed.”

1

In discussing precision, many schol-

ars address only accuracy. “Accuracy” refers to a weapon’s capacity to

strike a specific aimpoint

2

and is an integral aspect of any precision air-

strike.

But accuracy alone is insufficient to render a strike “precise.” Precision

is just as dependent on command, control, communications, computers,

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (known as C4ISR) capabili-

ties. In fact, on a complex battlefield, ISR,

3

not accuracy, often proves the

key aspect of a precision airstrike. For example, during Operation Endur-

ing Freedom U.S. aircraft twice mistakenly attacked International Commit-

tee of the Red Cross warehouses.

4

Weapons accuracy played no role in the

attacks—the missiles landed exactly where they were aimed. Instead, the

problem was a failure in the targeting process, which is C4ISR driven.

It is likewise important to recognize that the environment in which an

airstrike takes place can affect the accuracy of a weapon system and the

quality of the associated C4ISR. For instance, nighttime or inclement

1

. Michae l N. Sc hmitt, Precision Attack and International Humanitarian Law, 87 INTER-

NATIONAL REVIEW OF THE RED CROSS 445, 446 (2005).

2

. An “aimpoint” is “[a] point associated with a target and assigned for a specific

weapon impact. [It] may be defined descriptively (e.g., ve nt in center of roof), by grid ref-

erence, or geolocation. More specific classifications of aimpoint include desired point of

impact, joint d esired point of impact, and desired mean point of impact.” Joint Chiefs of

Staff, Joint Publication 1-02, DoD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms (Nov. 8,

2010), a s amended through July 15, 2012, http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/dod_dictionary

[hereinafter DoD Dictionary].

3

. “[I]ntelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance” is “[a]n activity that synchronizes

and integrates the planning and operation of sensors, assets, and processing, exploitation,

and dissemination systems in direct support of current and future operations. This is an

integrated intelligence and operations function.” Id.

4

. For a discussion of these incidents, see Sean D. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the

United States Relating to I nternational Law, 96 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

247 (2002).