Employing the Targeted Killing Strategy against Terrorist Leaders: A Legal Criticism of Military Justifications with an Emphasis on Applicable International Law

Since the early 21st century, major changes have emerged in the attitudes of a few states toward counterterrorism. In this regard, Israel and the US have adopted unusual military strategies, e.g., targeted killings, in their martial doctrines to fight what they interpreted as terrorism. The foregoing strategy targets merely terrorist leaders and prevents massive campaigns against terrorism. However, no regulations in the international law have prescribed this strategy for counterterrorism. This study aims to determine the legal criticisms of military justifications for resorting to the targeted killing strategy. If it is essential to adopt this strategy, which has been neglected in the international law, what regulations must be observed? The authors used a descriptive-analytical method in this study as well as a comparative technique in some cases to address the foregoing question. In conclusion, although the targeting killing strategy is sometimes considered favorable from a martial perspective, it is difficult to legally justify this strategy. Therefore, five regulations should be followed if this strategy is deemed to be applicable.