The Lawfare Podcast — Lawfare Daily: The State of IHL (Feb 26, 2026)

Overview

This episode of the Lawfare Podcast, hosted by Lauren Voss, focuses on the current status of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) amid growing global conflict and technological advancements in warfare. Lauren is joined by Stuart Casey-Maslin, head of the Geneva Academy’s IHL in Focus Project, to discuss their comprehensive report on IHL compliance from July 2024 to late 2025. The conversation examines emerging threats to IHL, the proliferation of new technologies like drones and autonomous weapons, the effectiveness of existing treaties, and prospects for new legal frameworks.

Main Discussion & Key Points

1. The Geneva Academy’s Motivation for the Report

• Filling an Information Gap: The Geneva Academy undertook this project because existing organizations (ICRC, UN) are constrained by confidentiality or political pressure and cannot name perpetrators. As an academic institution, the Geneva Academy can address violations more openly.
• Quote:

  “The advantage that we have as an academic institution is that where we have the evidence, we're able to say it. Even though that might be uncomfortable reading for certain governments.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [03:19]

2. IHL’s Precarious State and Trends in Violations

• No 'Golden Age': There has never been perfect compliance with IHL; however, recent years show a marked deterioration, with grave violations becoming normalized.
• Recent Crises: The conflicts in Gaza and Sudan exemplify alarming civilian harm and lawlessness.
• Rise in Sexual Violence: Especially highlighted in Sudan, with gang rapes now occurring openly in the streets, surpassing previous horrors and signaling systemic failure to protect civilians.
• Quote:

  “There was never a golden age… violations, serious violations, almost becoming accepted, almost being identified as the new normal.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [04:31]

• Technological Impact: Precision technologies should be reducing harm, but are often used to deliberately target civilians. Drones, originally potentially protective of civilian lives, are increasingly used by both state and non-state actors to attack civilian targets.
• Quote:

  “These weapons give the party to the conflict the possibility to be precise… Instead, what are we seeing? We're seeing their use… to deliberately target civilians.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [01:25]

3. Proliferation of Drones and Autonomous Weapon Systems

• Spread to Non-State Actors: Armed drone technology is now common among non-state actors, increasing risks for civilians.
• Trend Towards Autonomy: With jamming and hacking risks, full autonomy in weapons is becoming more likely. Concerns are raised that algorithms cannot make nuanced decisions about surrenders or distinguish non-combatants.
• Quote:

  “When you're leaving it to the algorithm, the algorithm can't take a surrender. The algorithm can't decide whether a civilian is directly participating in hostilities or not. They just don't have that ability.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [10:08]

4. Strategic and Legal Implications of Civilian Targeting

• Self-Defeating Tactics: Deliberate attacks on civilians undermine military objectives and invite allegations of war crimes.
• Divergence Among Actors: The report credits Ukraine for, largely, not responding to Russian indiscriminate tactics in kind, showing compliance is possible even under immense pressure.
• Quote:

  “You want to eliminate the enemy… Make sure that you're not harming civilians, that you're not laying yourself open to a charge of a war crime.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [11:40]

5. Case Study: Ukraine

• Escalating Civilian Harm: The report documents a surge in civilian casualties in Ukraine, attributed to Russian missile strikes targeting energy infrastructure and civilian areas—strategies proven ineffective in changing wartime resolve.
• Quote:

  “There is no evidence that that works. We tried that in the Second World War… All it does is reinforce the fact that you need to fight on.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [21:58]

6. Enforcement, Accountability, and Legal Mechanisms

• Weakened Accountability: Pressure on funding and political support for bodies like the ICC and the UN Human Rights Council undermines enforcement.
• Quote:

  “If ever we needed international criminal law to support the compliance and respect of international humanitarian law, it's now... Taking them away, undermining them, most certainly makes the situation worse.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [23:14]

7. Shortcomings of Existing Treaties & Need for New Rules

• Outdated Legal Regime: Core combat rules were drafted in the 1970s. Today’s weapons, such as precision-guided munitions, are not required over populated areas, and problematic weapons like cluster munitions and white phosphorus remain inadequately regulated.
• Political Declarations vs. Binding Treaties: Soft law instruments like the 2022 Explosive Weapons Declaration are useful but lack specifics and teeth compared to treaties.
• Quote:

  “It is still okay to drop gravity ordnance from 45,000ft. It's still okay to fire cluster missions by artillery from 50km away into a populated area. That cannot be right.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [24:38]

8. Outlook: Is Progress Possible?

• Historical Optimism: While the current moment is grim, precedents from the Cold War show that even after existential crises, new treaties can emerge.
• Call to Action: The only way forward is to try for new rules—waiting for the “right moment” risks perpetual inaction.
• Quote:

  “If we say, oh well, it's not a good time. It's never a good time, but it is always a good time to try.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [27:36]

9. The Geneva Academy’s Ongoing Work

• Continuous Monitoring: The Academy updates its “War Watch” website with ongoing conflict reports, including recent uploads on Venezuela, Haiti, and Mexico, with hopes of contributing to improved transparency and debate about compliance.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the myth of a 'golden age':

  “The golden age that never existed. Yeah, I'd settle for bronze, frankly. And we're a long, long way from that.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [29:20]

• On the role of technology:

  “We humans are the ones that are setting the algorithm… We could program them to be even more protective of human life, of civilian life, than IHL requires. That is a decision that we could take.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [10:52]

• On the future of IHL compliance:

  “We want people to use this report, to read this report and to comment on this report and hope that we can contribute to at least steadying the ship. I won't suggest back to a golden age.”
  — Stuart Casey-Maslin [29:04]

Key Timestamps

• [01:25] Emergence of drone use by state and non-state actors; deliberate targeting of civilians.
• [03:19] Why the Geneva Academy report was needed; independence to name violators.
• [04:31] The existential threat to IHL and normalization of violations.
• [06:01 - 07:50] Trends: increased sexual violence and misuse of precision technology.
• [08:22 - 10:39] Drone proliferation, autonomy, and IHL implications.
• [11:40] Critique of targeting civilians and comparative IHL compliance.
• [13:00] Example of Ukrainian restraint and strategic value of IHL.
• [21:58] Reasons for increased civilian casualties in Ukraine.
• [23:14] Urgency of accountability mechanisms.
• [24:38] Need for treaty updates; outdated weapon regulation.
• [26:17] On the inadequacy of non-binding declarations.
• [27:36] On the potential for treaty progress despite adversity.
• [28:21] Announcement of the War Watch website and ongoing monitoring.

Conclusion

This episode provides a sobering yet necessary examination of IHL’s erosion in practice and the challenges posed by modern warfare technologies. Through concrete examples and historical perspective, Stuart Casey-Maslin underscores the dire need for renewed legal innovation, sustained monitoring, and collective action to limit the civilian harms of conflict. The key takeaway: while a return to a mythical “golden age” is unrealistic, incremental progress is still possible—and urgently needed—through transparency, advocacy, and legal reform.