The artificial intelligence capabilities of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWSs) will revolutionize warfare. States have identified an imperative to create an accountability framework to address situations where use of a LAWS triggers an international crime. Indeed, the advent of LAWSs necessitates that we rethink how we attribute criminal accountability and how we understand traditional legal notions used for assigning account-ability. If the goals of international criminal law are to be promoted, the notion of moral agency should not be redefined to include LAWSs. Rather, there is a need for a distributed approach to accountability that ascribes responsibility to a senior political leader, a senior defense official responsible for promulgating policy on LAWSs, a weapon manufacturer, a weapon de-signer, a military commander, and an operator. The basis for this assertion is that a LAWS is in a matrix of relations with these individuals, meaning that they operate in an interdependent manner. These individuals are additionally in a matrix of relations with each other, and their conduct is inter-connected. The criteria for assigning accountability should be whether the individual exercised authority in the circumstances over: (1) the LAWS either directly or through another person and (2) the manner in which the LAWS was integrated with the operator. The context of LAWSs calls for a wider understanding of what constitutes an exercise of authority than the definition the doctrine of command responsibility encapsulates. The conclusion proposes a legal test for assigning accountability for international crimes that arise from LAWSs.<\/p>\n