Russia and US leaders in opposing a ban on autonomous weapons

Some activists are warning that the development of armies of fully autonomous robotic weapons could be only 3 or 4 years away. As a result some countries are attempting to place a ban on the weapons before they are an established fact.

	1 of 2

EU and UN both support a ban on robotic weapons

Many peace activists also support the ban including Jody Williams, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 for leading efforts to ban land mines. Williams urged Germany to lead an international campaign to ban the so-called killer robots. She said that Germany should take steps to ensure that humans remain in control of all lethal weapons and they should not become autonomous.

A recent article notes that delegates have been meeting in Geneva at the UN in order to discuss potential restrictions under international law on the use of autonomous weapons systems that employ AI to decide when and where to kill. The article reports: "Most states taking part – and particularly those from the global south – support either a total ban or strict legal regulation governing their development and deployment, a position backed by the UN secretary general, António Guterres, who has described machines empowered to kill as “morally repugnant”"

As the appended image and video from 2015 show warnings about autonomous weapons have already been around for years.

US and Russia are leading opponents of the ban

Both countries oppose the ban or any limitations the would prevent them from building the robots. The UK, Israel and Austalia also oppose the ban. Opponents claim the ban is premature. However, if there is no ban there is likely to be an AI arms race.

While the UK Defense Ministry said it had no plans to develop fully autonomous killer robots they have announced that they already are in the process of developing killer drone swarms that theoretically could have full autonomy. There are fears that the US, which already has a huge number of attack drones, could decide to eliminate the human button pusher and simply let the drones decide whether to fire on the basis of its observations and algorithms that are used to determine its actions. Already drone operators may in effect leave the firing decision up to what a drone suggests on the basis of its observations.

A recent article notes: "Critics fear that the increasingly autonomous drones, missile defence systems and tanks made possible by new artificial intelligence could turn rogue in a cyber-attack or as a result of programming errors.

Previously published in DIgital Journal

Activists and experts seek ban on robot killer weapons

Many experts and campaigners are calling for a ban on "killer robots". Autonomous, artificial intelligence powered guns, planes, tanks and ships could fight future wars without being subject to any human control.

Use of totally autonomous weapons in war violates international law

The call for the ban on the weapons is because their use in a war is regarded as breaking international law according to some experts and campaigners. As AI-powered guns, planes, ships and tanks are being developed by nations with high tech, it appears likely some will fight in wars without any human intervention.

International law requires emerging technologies be judged according to the "principle of humanity" and the "dictates of public conscience" according to a new report by Human Rights Watch and the Harvard Law School's International Human Rights Clinic.

Bonnie Docherty of Human Rights Watch said: “Permitting the development and use of killer robots would undermine established moral and legal standards. Countries should work together to preemptively ban these weapons systems before they proliferate around the world. The groundswell of opposition among scientists, faith leaders, tech companies, nongovernmental groups, and ordinary citizens shows that the public understands that killer robots cross a moral threshold. Their concerns, shared by many governments, deserve an immediate response.”

Some countries already support a ban on the weapons

Twenty-six countries already support a ban on fully autonomous weapons. Austria, Belgium and China recently joined thousands of AI experts and more than 20 Nobel peace prize laureates in declaring support for a ban.

On the 27 of August more than 70 governments will be meeting in Geneva for the sixth time to discuss the issues raised by fully autonomous weapons.

The talks have been formalized under a major disarmament treaty back in 2017 but there has been frustration at the slow pace of the process. If countries request that negotiation begin in 2019, this could help pave the way for formal approval this November. Almost every country agrees that there should be some human control over the use of force after a meeting this April.

Noel Sharkey, a spokesperson for the Campaign to Ban Killer Robots said: “The idea of delegating life and death decisions to cold compassionless machines without empathy or understanding cannot comply with the Martens clause and it makes my blood run cold. We expect more European countries will step up and that the clamour will get us that key word ‘negotiation’ into the mandate for next year. There is already a growing consensus that human control of weapons systems is crucial in conflict. Some states would prefer to shift from a prohibition protocol to one that requires a positive obligation to ensure meaningful human control, and both amount to the same humanitarian law.” Prof. Sharkey is featured on the appended video.

Use of autonomous weapons will soon be widespread

High-ranking military officials claim that the use of fully autonomous weapons will be widespread in just a matter of years. The weapons would select and fire at targets without any meaningful human interventions.

Already at least 381 partly autonomous weapons and military robotic systems have been deployed or are now being developed in 32 different countries. These include France, Israel, Russia, the U.K. and the U.S.

There are reports that Russia opposes the ban on fully autonomous weapons along with various other countries including the United States. These countries could try to block and further negotiations towards a ban.

The Martens Clause in international law

Many think that the use of fully autonomous weapons in a war theater would violate what is called the Martens Clause which is described by Wikipedia as follows: "The Martens Clause (pronounced /mar'tɛnz/) was introduced into the preamble to the 1899 Hague Convention II – Laws and Customs of War on Land...The clause took its name from a declaration read by Friedrich Martens,.. the Russian delegate at the Hague Peace Conferences of 1899. It reads as follows":

Until a more complete code of the laws of war is issued, the High Contracting Parties think it right to declare that in cases not included in the Regulations adopted by them, populations and belligerents remain under the protection and empire of the principles of international law, as they result from the usages established between civilized nations, from the laws of humanity and the requirements of the public conscience.

— Convention with respect to the laws of war on land (Hague II), 29 July 1899.[

Although the clause did not appear in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 it has been included in the additional protocols of 1977.

A Human RIghts Watch report says: "This report shows how fully autonomous weapons, which would be able to select and engage targets without meaningful human control, would contravene both prongs of the Martens Clause: the principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience. To comply with the Martens Clause, states should adopt a preemptive ban on the weapons’ development, production, and use."

Previously published in Digital Journal