Animals are highly vulnerable in war. However, they are only incidentally protected by international humanitarian law, namely as mere objects (or property), as specially protected objects, as part of the environment, as endangered species, as war weapons, or as means of medical transport, search and rescue. They are neither treated as ‘subjects of protection’ nor are they granted any rights. The research has revealed that the few international humanitarian law provisions that could potentially apply to animals have rarely been enforced or effectively implemented by international courts and tribunals. In light of these general observations, the concluding chapter summarises the key findings of the study. It highlights the main legal challenges that an agenda of protection of animals during warfare faces. It then formulates recommendations for addressing these challenges with a view to strengthening and developing the legal framework.

Some principles enshrined in particular in Geneva Conventions I and IV and in Additional Protocol I regarding the protection of medical transports, equipment and personnel could potentially provide minimum safeguards for animals when these are used as a means of medical transportation or in search and rescue operations. However, this regime is in many respects inappropriate for the protection of animals. It does not take into account the fact that animals are sentient beings experiencing emotion, pain and distress. Therefore, the application of sui generis principles, tailored to the specific needs of living creatures – such as the principles of animal dignity, no military involvement and return to homeland – should be conceived in light of recent legal trends on the welfare and rights of animals in peacetime.

This chapter examines to what extent ‘animal soldiers’ could obtain two related legal status in light of their contribution to the war effort. They could be combatants when involved in hostilities and prisoners of war after falling into enemy hands. In consequence, they would be protected by Geneva Convention III and Additional Protocol I. While these status have not been envisaged to apply to animals, elements of the protection provided by the said instruments could inspire the analogous design of a protective regime for ‘animal soldiers’. This regime would be based on the following principles: no military involvement in hostilities, subsidiarity, humane treatment and animal dignity.