International law on the use of force has become increasingly contested.
Such contestation also happens in the form of technologically-mediated state
practices, for example via designing and using drones or weapon systems
integrating autonomous or Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies. Over
time, such practices can deliberatively and tacitly shape new norms. To make
sense of such dynamics, the article differentiates between an international
normative order and an international legal order and theorises how their
congruence/incongruence affects (social and legal) norms governing the use
of force. These arguments combine norm research with scholarship across
critical international law, practice theories, and science and technology studies
to examine the emergence of contested areas in between the international
normative and legal orders. The paper examines the practice of targeted killing
in the context of jus contra bellum and the emerging norm of ‘meaningful’
human control in jus in bello. These examples demonstrate the emergence of
significant areas of contestation in between the international normative and
legal orders – and the adverse consequences of this development for the
restraining quality of international law.
