Wartime Imagery and the Standard of Care in the Implementation of International Humanitarian Law

Abstract Horrific images of war generate pressure on belligerent parties to avoid or reduce civilian casualties. The demands from this pressure often exceed the standard of care which belligerent parties apply to uphold their obligations under international humanitarian law (IHL). By tracing the role that wartime images have played in shaping the public discourse of IHL implementation, this article examines the dynamics through which these images might skew the standard of care applicable to targeting operations under IHL. It does so by dissecting the pitfalls of wartime imagery with reference to: (a) command intent; (b) factual knowledge; and (c) adversarial manipulation. Having identified these pitfalls, the article then discusses how imagery-driven legal assessment could shift the standard of care that military decision-makers are reasonably expected to take when applying the principles of distinction, proportionality, and the duty to exercise feasible precautions during targeting operations. This article concludes that differentiated standards of care only serve the interests of a belligerent that shows little respect for IHL and therefore, in the long run, undermines the normative foundation upon which this body of law has been built to safeguard humanity in warfighting.