Current laws, like the Geneva Conventions and UNCLOS, define civilian objects by their physical function. A pipeline carries gas. That is civilian. But when a state uses that flow to blackmail neighbors, the asset shifts from a utility to a weapon.
Legal frameworks need a functional use test. Instead of asking who owns the pipe, the law should ask what effect the asset exerts on national security. This would create a specific category for strategic coercion assets.
If a pipeline serves as a tool for energy blackmail, it loses its protected status. This doesn't make every gas line a target. It requires a high evidentiary bar based on proven patterns of weaponization.
Without this shift, states hide behind civilian labels while strangling economies. The law must recognize that an economic chokehold can be as lethal as a naval blockade. Concrete rules would stop the ambiguity that lets actors sabotage assets with plausible deniability.
