Imagine an international armed conflict in which a State conducts a military cyber operation that erases an adversary's logistics database. Does computer data qualify as an "object", and if civilian in character, a protected civilian object under IHL? 

This article examines the legal approaches to that threshold question and considers whether existing interpretations remain adequate for warfare in the digital age. 

Using the "Anthropic moment" as its starting point, this post identifies an "impossible trinity" between state, society, and the market in military AI governance and argues that elected legislatures, through statutory baselines and transnational parliamentary coordination grounded in Article 36 reviews, are the only actors able to restore democratic control.

Reposted from the OpinioJuris (26 February 2026) by Assistant Professor Jessica Dorsey (Utrecht University School of Law); Professor Elke Schwarz i(Queen Mary University London); Professor Ingvild Bode i(University of Southern Denmark); Associate Professor Zena Assaad (Australian National University) and Dr Neil Renic (University of New South Wales). The authors are all members of the Independent Advisory Board on Legal Reviews of the Responsible by Design Institute.

Reposted from the OpinioJuris (26/02/2026) by Assistant Professor Jessica Dorsey (Utrecht University School of Law) ; Professor Elke Schwarz i(Queen Mary University London); Professor Ingvild Bode i(University of Southern Denmark); Associate Professor Zena Assaad (Australian National University) and Dr Neil Renic (University of New South Wales). The authors are all members of the Independent Advisory Board on Legal Reviews of the Responsible by Design Institute.