Artificial Intelligence Reshaping the Iran Conflict

The growing use of artificial intelligence in modern warfare has triggered fresh debate as tensions continue between the United States, Israel, and Iran. Military analysts and policymakers are increasingly examining how rapidly advancing digital technologies are altering the nature of armed conflict, raising complex questions about ethics, legality, and accountability.

The discussion intensified after the United States government abruptly removed one of its artificial intelligence technology suppliers shortly before a military operation began on 28 February. The decision reportedly followed disagreements between the government and the technology provider over ethical restrictions and operational rules governing the use of artificial intelligence in combat environments.

Concern over the military use of artificial intelligence has also reached international forums. In Geneva, Switzerland, experts from several countries recently convened for a specialised meeting to discuss whether deploying artificial intelligence in warfare is legally acceptable under existing international law. Particular attention was given to autonomous weapons capable of selecting and attacking targets without direct human control. Negotiators are currently exploring the possibility of establishing an international agreement to regulate or restrict such systems.

Michael Horowitz, a prominent security analyst, has warned that technological development is moving much faster than the legal frameworks designed to regulate it. According to Horowitz, governments and international institutions are struggling to keep pace with innovations that could fundamentally transform military strategy. Another researcher, Craig Jones, has cautioned that the absence of clear global guidelines could allow artificial intelligence to be misused in future conflicts. He argues that the risks associated with artificial intelligence–driven warfare are no longer theoretical but increasingly immediate.

The United States military has acknowledged that artificial intelligence tools are being used in the ongoing conflict involving Iran. According to Brad Cooper, head of the United States Central Command, advanced analytical systems are helping soldiers process vast volumes of intelligence data at unprecedented speed. Such tools enable commanders to interpret satellite imagery, surveillance footage, and battlefield reports more efficiently, allowing faster operational decisions.

One notable technology reportedly employed in this context is an advanced image-analysis system capable of identifying potential enemy positions by analysing visual data collected from drones and surveillance platforms. Although the full operational details remain classified, several media reports suggest that similar systems have been used during strikes targeting Iranian facilities.

Artificial intelligence is currently used in several operational areas within modern warfare, as illustrated below.

Despite the potential benefits of these technologies, their use has raised serious humanitarian concerns. Reports indicate that civilian casualties have increased during the latest phase of hostilities. In one particularly devastating incident, a bombing in southern Iran struck a school, killing more than 170 people, many of them children. Since the military operation began on 28 February, the total death toll across affected regions in Iran has reportedly exceeded 1,300 people.

Advocates of artificial intelligence in warfare argue that advanced targeting systems could theoretically improve precision and reduce accidental civilian deaths. However, recent conflicts suggest that such expectations may not always match reality. Artificial intelligence–assisted drones have already been used in conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, yet civilian casualties in those regions remain significant.

Craig Jones notes that there is currently no conclusive evidence proving that artificial intelligence reduces human fatalities in war. On the contrary, the technology may introduce new forms of risk, especially when automated systems make rapid decisions based on incomplete data.

The debate has intensified around fully autonomous weapons capable of launching attacks without human approval. International humanitarian law requires that weapons systems distinguish between combatants and civilians. Critics argue that artificial intelligence systems cannot yet guarantee such distinctions reliably, raising doubts about their compliance with established legal standards.

Disagreements have also emerged between governments and technology companies regarding the acceptable limits of artificial intelligence deployment. Since 2024, a major artificial intelligence developer had been working under a contract worth approximately 200 million dollars to support analytical systems used by the United States Department of Defense. However, tensions grew after the government introduced new regulations in January allowing broader official use of artificial intelligence technologies for legal and operational purposes.

The technology firm reportedly refused to allow its systems to be used for mass civilian surveillance or fully autonomous weapons operations, arguing that the current generation of artificial intelligence is not sufficiently reliable for such critical decisions.

The dispute escalated further when the United States President ordered government agencies on 27 February to cease using that company’s technology. Analysts believe the conflict reflects deeper disagreements about the future direction of military artificial intelligence.

International reactions have also emerged. On 11 March, China warned against excessive reliance on artificial intelligence in military operations. A spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Defence stated that allowing algorithms to determine matters of life and death could undermine ethical responsibility and weaken global accountability in warfare.

Some observers fear that uncontrolled military artificial intelligence could eventually place decision-making beyond meaningful human oversight. The possibility of automated systems escalating conflicts without human restraint has revived concerns once considered purely fictional.

As governments race to harness the strategic advantages of artificial intelligence, the international community now faces a critical challenge: ensuring that technological innovation in warfare remains subject to clear legal rules, human judgment, and ethical responsibility.