Military Technology and Doctrine Development

I am a student in the US Army Intermediate Level Education. One of the discussion topics today was whether Army doctrine has sufficiently kept up with technological advancements in military weaponry. Typically, technology progresses much faster than the doctrine writers can draft and publish guidance on the proper and legal uses of the weaponry. One problem doctrine writers face is drafting guidance that complies with national and international law. Often the new technology has not been contemplated by lawmakers or interpreted by any federal or international court system under current law. Drafting current doctrine that clearly complies with the law becomes nearly impossible.

One example of this involves the use of lasers in combat for the specific purpose of blinding the enemy. The issues become whether it is possible under existing international law to use these types of lasers in this manner and if so, when is such a use legal? Under international law, all can agree that any given use of a weapon may not be designed to cause unnecessary suffering. At first glance, it would seem that blinding the enemy is much more humane than killing the enemy. However, under current tribunal interpretation of the law, weapons designed to specifically inflict long-term suffering (like exploding glass shards) are considered in violation of the law. No international tribunal has examined this question as it relates to blinding lasers, making it very difficult for doctrine writers to create proper and legal uses of the weapon. Therefore, one reason doctrine has not kept pace with new military technology is because the law does not address and cannot be applied to the new technology.

The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the US Government.

MAJ Kelli Petersen, Student
Command and General Staff College, ILE
Fort Belvoir, VA