This chapter suggests three legal strategies to leverage international humanitarian law for the protection of weaponised animals in armed conflict in the absence of a direct prohibition of animal weapons. Firstly, one could rely on international, regional organisation and domestic law during non-international armed conflict. Secondly, states can be confronted with their obligation to conduct weapons reviews (relating to international armed conflict). Thirdly, states proposing a ban or regulation on lethal autonomous weapons could be encouraged to promote or support comparable action towards weaponised animals. Even all three strategies in combination would not result in a universal prohibition against weaponising animals. The admittedly patchwork outcome(s) would only offer some measure of protection of animals where little currently exists. Additionally, each line of argument has the potential of gaining additional traction, whether as a matter of law, custom or policy, thus increasing the protection of animals.

Relying on the methodology explained in the preceding chapter, Chapter 4 examines the object of the review procedure – ‘a new weapon, means and methods of warfare’. It argues that the object of the review has a broad meaning and covers a wide range of existing and emerging military technology designed or, in certain circumstances, used to trigger damage to objects or injury to individuals. ‘Methods of warfare’ relate to the ways weapons are used as well as operational tactics, techniques and procedures resorted to on a structural basis. The provision covers military capabilities newly introduced into the State’s arsenal, state-of-the-art weapons technology, and existing weapon systems that are adapted in a way that alters their use or effects. [118 words]