I fear that the introduction of rules, prescriptive boundaries and frameworks will not inhibit the militarisation of this context so much as positively incentivise it, the culture and history of adversarial psychology being what it is. A line must certainly be drawn in the sand, but it seems that most of these (kinds of) prohibitions are retrospective, rushed and hardly up to the task of managing the intransigent complexity of technological acceleration in (and beyond) all spheres of international competition.
Legal and governance frameworks work by ponderous empirical aggregation, self-gravitating organisational memory and procedural sedimentation or negotiation in ways which hardly match the actual pace of contemporary technological innovation and developmental novelty. Effectively managing entropy and unpredictable future system states appears to be a pivotally conspicuous conceptual absence here. An intractable tide of complexity requires as much innovation in governance as in technology; perhaps a revolution in the technologies of governance?