Journal of Science Policy & Governance
Volume 21, Issue 01 | October 17, 2022

Technology Assessment: To Ban or not to Ban. Analyzing the Banning Process of Autonomous Weapon Systems

Celien De Stercke
Ghent University Department of Criminology, Criminal Law and Social Law, Ghent, Belgium

​Corresponding author: [email protected]​
Keywords: autonomous weapons; killer robots; AWS; cyber warfare; policy analysis
https://doi.org/10.38126/JSPG210102​

Executive Summary

Over the last decade, autonomous weapon systems (AWS), also known as ‘killer robots’, have been the subject of widespread debate. These systems impose various ethical, legal, and societal concerns with arguments both in favor and opposed to the weaponry. Consequently, an international policy debate arose out of an urge to ban these systems. AWS are widely discussed at the Human Rights Council debate, the United Nations General Assembly First Committee on Disarmament and International Security, and at gatherings of the Convention of Conventional Weapons (CCW), in particular the Expert Meetings on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS). Early skepticism towards the use of AWS brought a potential ban to the forefront of policy making decisions with the support of a campaign to 'Stop Killer Robots' launched by the Human Rights Watch (HRW) in 2013. The movement is supported by Amnesty International, Pax Christi International, and the International Peace Bureau, among others. This campaign has catalyzed an international regulation process on the level of the United Nations (UN). Both a new protocol to the Convention on Conventional Weapons or a new international treaty have been considered. However, a lack of consensus stalls the process, and as such, leaves AWS in a regulatory gray zone.

-Read the full article through download.-

Background header image courtesy of Drones Rate
Celien De Stercke is a Criminologist at the Institute for International Research on Criminal Policy (IRCP) and a member of the imec-DistriNet, a Research Group Computer Sciences at the KU Leuven. In 2022, she graduated from Ghent University with an M.Sc. in Criminological Sciences. She aims to pursue a PhD on the intersection of her technical and social background, being the phenomenon of cyber warfare. Celien researches the applicability of governance of security theories to cyberspace, in particular cyber mercenaries, in order to develop governance architecture model scenarios to counter cyber threats. 
​
Acknowledgements
​The author would like to thank the reviewers, Joseph Long and Ethan FitzGerald, for their valuable feedback on the manuscript.

References

  1. Anderson, Kenneth, and Matthew C Waxman. 2013. “Law and Ethics for Autonomous Weapon Systems: Why a Ban Law and Ethics for Autonomous Weapon Systems: Why a Ban Won’t Work and How the Laws of War Can Won’t Work and How the Laws of War Can.” AMERICAN UNIVERSITY. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarshipAvailableat:https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1803.
  2. Asaro, Peter. 2013. “On Banning Autonomous Weapon Systems: Human Rights, Automation, and the Dehumanization of Lethal Decision-Making.” International Review of the Red Cross 94 (886): 687–709. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383112000768.
  3. Boulanin, Vincent. 2016. “Mapping the Debate on LAWS at the CCW: Taking Stock and Moving Forward.” http://www.stopkillerrobots.org/wp-content/.
  4. Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. 2021. “About. Actions and Achievements.” 2021. https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/action-and-achievements/.
  5. Davison, Neil. 2018. “A Legal Perspective: Autonomous Weapon Systems under International Humanitarian Law.” https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18356/6fce2bae-en.
  6. Etzioni, Amitai, and Oren Etzioni. 2017. “Pros and Cons of Autonomous Weapons Systems.” Military Review, no. May-June: 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69623-2_16.
  7. European Parliament. 2014. “Joint Motion for a Resolution on the Use of Armed Drones.” European Union.
  8. European Parliament. 2018. “European Parliament Resolution of 12 September 2018 on Autonomous Weapon Systems.” Official Journal of the European Union. European Union. https://doi.org/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/e2134.
  9. Gao, Charlie. 2022. “The Ultimate Weapon of War No One Is Talking About.” The National Interest, 2022. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ultimate-weapon-war-no-one-talking-about-42497.
  10. Hernandez, Joe. 2021. “A Military Drone With A Mind Of Its Own Was Used In Combat, U.N. Says.” NPR, 2021. https://www.npr.org/2021/06/01/1002196245/a-u-n-report-suggests-libya-saw-the-first-battlefield-killing-by-an-autonomous-d?t=1625127946959&t=16604712.
  11. Heyns, Christof. 2013. “Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Christof Heyns.” United Nations Human Rights Council.
  12. Heyns, Christof. 2016. “Autonomous Weapon Systems: Living a Dignified Life and Dying a Dignified Death.” In Autonomous Weapons Systems. Law, Ethics, Policy, edited by Nehal Bhuta, Susanne Beck, Robin Geib, Hin-Yan Liu, and Claus Kreb, 3–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  13. Horowitz, Michael C. 2019. “When Speed Kills: Autonomous Weapon Systems, Deterrence, and Stability.”
  14. HRW. 2015. “The Lack of Accountability for Killer Robots.” http://www.hrw.org.
  15. HRW. 2020. “Stopping Killer Robots. Country Positions on Banning Fully Autonomous Weapons and Retaining Human Control.” https://www.hrw.org/report/2020/08/10/stopping-killer-robots/country-positions-banning-fully-autonomous-weapons-and#_ftn5. 
  16. ICRC. 2016. “Autonomous Weapons: Decisions to Kill and Destroy Are a Human Responsibility.” International Committee of the Red Cross. 2016. https://www.icrc.org/en/document/statement-icrc-lethal-autonomous-weapons-systems.
  17. ICRC. 2022. “Rule 47. Attacks against Persons Hors de Combat.” ICRC, Customary IHL Database. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule47.
  18. ISO. 2014. “ISO/TC 20/SC 16 Unmanned Aircraft Systems.” ISO. 2014. https://www.iso.org/committee/5336224.html.
  19. ISO. 2021. “95.020 Military in General.” ISO. 2021. https://www.iso.org/ics/95.020/x/.
  20. Lopez, Todd C. 2022. “More HIMARS, Phoenix Ghost Drones Bound for Ukraine.” U.S. Department of Defense, 2022. https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3103655/more-himars-phoenix-ghost-drones-bound-for-ukraine/.
  21. Nasu, Hitoshi. 2021. “THE KARGU-2 AUTONOMOUS ATTACK DRONE: LEGAL & ETHICAL DIMENSIONS.” Articles of War. https://lieber.westpoint.edu/kargu-2-autonomous-attack-drone-legal-ethical/.
  22. Reim, Garrett. 2020. “US Air Force Grapples with Vexing Problem of AI Spoofing.” FlightGlobal. 2020. https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/us-air-force-grapples-with-vexing-problem-of-ai-spoofing/139973.article#:~:text=The%20US%20Department%20of%20Defense,vulnerabilities%20that%20adversaries%20could%20exploit.
  23. Rogoway, Tyler. 2021. “Meet Israel’s ‘Suicide Squad’ of Self Sacrificing Drones.” The Warzone, 2021. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4760/meet-israels-suicide-squad-of-self-sacrificing-drones.
  24. Sartor, Giovanni, and Andrea Omicini. 2016. “The Autonomy of Technological Systems and Responsibilities for Their Use.” In Autonomous Weapons Systems. Law, Ethics, Policy, edited by Nehal Bhuta, Susanne Beck, Robin Geib, Hin-Yan Liu, and Claus Kreb, 39–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  25. Sayler, Kelley M. 2021. “Defense Primer: US Policy on Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems.”
  26. Scharre, Paul. 2016. “Autonomous Weapons and Operational Risk Ethical Autonomy Project.”
  27. Scharre, Paul. 2018. Army of None. Autonomous Weapons and the Future of War. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
  28. Sehrawat, Vivek. 2021. “Autonomous Weapon System and Command Responsibility.” Florida Journal of International Law 31. https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/fjilAvailableat:https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/fjil/vol31/iss3/2. ​
  29. Sharkey, Noel. 2007. “Robot Wars Are a Reality.” The Guardian. 2007. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/aug/18/comment.military.
  30. Sharkey, Noel. 2016. “Staying in the Loop: Human Supervisory Control of Weapons.” In Autonomous Weapons Systems. Law, Ethics, Policy, edited by Nehal Bhuta, Susanne Beck, Robin Geib, Hin-Yan Liu, and Claus Kreb, 23–39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  31. Stürchler, Nikolas and Michael Siegrist. 2017. “A ‘Compliance-Based’ Approach to Autonomous Weapon Systems.” EJIL:Talk! 2017. https://www.ejiltalk.org/a-compliance-based-approach-to-autonomous-weapon-systems/.
  32. Tamburrini, Guglielmo. 2016. “On Banning Autonomous Weapons Systems: From Deontological to Wide Consequentialist Reasons.” In Autonomous Weapons Systems. Law, Ethics, Policy, edited by Nehal Bhuta, Susanne Beck, Robin Geib, Hin-Yan Liu, and Claus Kreb, 122–43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  33. Topol, Sarah A. 2016. “How to Save Mankind from the New Breed of Killer Robots.” BuzzFeed. 2016. https://www.buzzfeed.com/sarahatopol/how-to-save-mankind-from-the-new-breed-of-killer-robots#.nw686R8Q0.
  34. UNIDIR. 2014. “Framing Discussions on the Weaponization of Increasingly Autonomous Technologies.” http://www.unidir.org/files/publications/pdfs/framing-discussions-on-the-weaponization-of-increasingly-autonomous-technologies-en-606.pdf.
  35. UNIDIR. 2017. “The Weaponization of Increasingly Autonomous Technologies: Autonomous Weapon Systems and Cyber Operations.” https://www.unidir.org/publication/weaponization-increasingly-autonomous-technologies-autonomous-weapon-systems-and-cyber.
  36. UNIDIR. 2021. “Known Unknowns: Data Issues and Military Autonomous Systems.” Geneva. https://doi.org/10.37559/SecTec/21/AI1.
  37. United Nations. 2019. “Final Report of the 2019 Meeting of the High Contracting Parties to the CCW.” Governmental Group of Experts. United Nations.
  38. United Nations. 2021. “Final Report of the Panel of Experts on Libya Established Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 1973 (2011) Summary.”
  39. United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. n.d. “Background on LAWS in the CCW.” Accessed April 25, 2021. https://www.un.org/disarmament/the-convention-on-certain-conventional-weapons/background-on-laws-in-the-ccw/.
  40. US Department of Defense. 2012. “Directive 3000.09: ‘Autonomy in Weapon Systems,’” no. 3000.09: 1–15.
  41. Werkhäuser, Nina. 2022. “′Killer Robots′: Will They Be Banned?” DW, 2022. https://www.dw.com/en/killer-robots-will-they-be-banned/a-62587436.
  42. Williams, Jody. 2011. “Borderless Battlefield : The CIA, the U.S. Military, and Drones.” International Journal of Intelligence Ethics 2 (I): 2–34.​
DISCLAIMER: The findings and conclusions published herein are solely attributed to the author and not necessarily endorsed or adopted by the Journal of Science Policy and Governance. Articles are distributed in compliance with copyright and trademark agreements.

ISSN 2372-2193
© 2022 Journal of Science Policy & Governance, Inc. All rights reserved. The opinions, findings and conclusions from JSPG publications, additional article commentaries and related events do not necessarily reflect the views of the journal.