Should states use social media to warn civilians in armed conflict?

Abstract

The essay argues that in the current conditions of the online information ecosystem, communications via social media to issue effective warnings ahead of military operations cannot discharge a state's legal obligation pursuant to Article 57(2)(c) Additional Protocol I.

In a high-stress situation like intense military operations, any communication channel used must be reliable and trustworthy for the recipients of critical, life-saving information. This is not the case if (1) the same party to the conflict is responsible for rendering the digital communication environment physically (by attacking infrastructures) or substantially (by spreading false or misleading information) unstable; (2) officials belonging to the party use the same channels to communicate war aims that suggest evacuation orders to be pretextual; and (3) the party uses the same channels/platforms to deceive the adversary.