AI让平民网络作战难被认定为直接参战，引发法律困境
Direct Causation in International Humanitarian Law and the Challenge of AI-Mediated Civilian Cyber Operations
- 用自主多智能体系统发动网络攻击，人类脱手后伤害由系统决策产生
- 现有法律框架无法认定此类行为为直接参与，只能视为间接参与
- 建议按目标设定精细度划分AI作战等级，现有治理工具未记录此关键属性
国际人道法保护平民免受直接攻击，除非其实际参与战斗，红十字国际委员会2009年指南据此提出三要素累积测试。本文指出，由人工智能驱动的平民网络行动对这一测试中的直接因果关系构成结构性挑战：当平民部署了近期进攻性AI研究中展示的自主多智能体系统后，由于伤害由人类脱离控制后的系统自主决策造成，‘单一因果链’标准失效；同时，‘核心部分’要求不适用，因其预设下游人类行为可独立定性。因此该框架只得将此类行为归为间接参与，与捕捉实际参战平民的立法初衷相悖。除法理分析外，本文识别出目标设定精细度是‘核心部分’测试隐含依赖的关键属性，将AI作战划分为五个层级，并指出现有技术治理工具未记录此属性。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
International humanitarian law protects civilians from direct attack unless and for such time as they take direct part in hostilities, with the ICRC's 2009 Interpretive Guidance operationalising this rule through a three-criterion cumulative test. This paper argues that AI-mediated civilian cyber operations challenge the direct causation element of this test in a structurally specific way: when a civilian deploys an autonomous multi-agent cyber system of the kind recently demonstrated in offensive AI research, the "one causal step" standard fails because harm is produced by system-generated decisions made after human disengagement, and the integral-part requirement does not extend because it presupposes downstream human contributors whose conduct can be independently classified. The framework therefore defaults to treating such deployments as indirect participation, in tension with its purpose of capturing civilians who personally take part in hostilities. Beyond the doctrinal analysis, this paper identifies goal-specification granularity as the property on which the integral-part test's concreteness component implicitly turns, classifies AI-mediated operations along a five-level spectrum, and argues that existing technical AI governance instruments do not log or report this property.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。