A former military lawyer says that technological advances in stealth and camouflage could violate agreed-upon norms on the conduct of warfare. Technology that allows military equipment to impersonate civilian vehicles are a no-no that were banned by the Geneva Conventions.

According to The Guardian , Bill Boothby, a former air commodore with the Royal Air Force and deputy director of RAF legal services, argues that chameleon-style camouflage that allows a military vehicle to resemble its surroundings may be illegal under Article 37 of the Geneva Conventions, "Prohibition of Perfidy".

The U.S. and other countries are pouring money into so-called " invisibility cloaks "—surfaces that could be applied to tanks, aircraft, and even ships that manipulate visible light, infrared, or radar waves waves. An observer—whether it be a fighter plane's radar or human eyeball—relies upon those waves reflecting upon an object in order to detect it.

In theory, the object could be coated with such surfaces to render them undetectable or dramatically change their appearance—at least from certain angles.

According to Boothby, such a change of appearance better not be to make a tank look like a family minivan or an ambulance. Article 37 specifically states that "the feigning of civilian, non-combatant status" is an example of wartime perfidy and thus prohibited under the Geneva Conventions. Military forces impersonating civilians inevitably puts real civilians in danger.

Reducing a 70 ton main battle tank's visible signature may make it look as small to observers as a family minivan. There is a legitimate military purpose to that, but with the unintentional consequence of the tank in some way resembling a civilian vehicle, something that has always been a risk. The crux of the matter is whether the feigning of civilians is intentional or not.

Ruses, on the other hand, are not prohibited: the use of camouflage, decoys, mock operations and misinformation are all perfectly legal. Making yourself look like nothing neither harms civilians nor does it delude the enemy into thinking protections afforded to civilians makes him safe.

Boothby's point is more of a precautionary warning that an condemnation. Military technology may advance by leaps and bounds, but it's still possible to make a good faith effort to comply with the Geneva Conventions. As long as defense contractors don't sell military vehicles with "press this to pretend you're a taco truck" buttons on them, they should be in the clear.

Here's a video of BAE Systems' ADAPTIV active camouflage technology at work:

This content is imported from YouTube. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io