A consideration of how emerging military leaders perceive themes in the autonomous weapon system discourse

ABSTRACT

The rapidly emerging scholarly literature responding to autonomous weapon systems has come to dominate our perceptions of future warfare. Scientists, governments, militaries, and civil society organisations continue to debate how to respond to their development. This paper draws on empirical data to consider how emerging defence leaders in the Australian Defence Force perceive major elements and questions within the autonomous weapon system literature. In doing so, this paper offers a data-driven end-user interpretation of the potential interactions between military officers and the autonomous weapon systems they may be asked to oversee. In the absence of a pre-emptive ban under international law, this paper presents a call for greater engagement with junior military leadership as a tool for analysing the assumptions made by policy makers and politicians on this issue.

KEYWORDS:

• Autonomous weapon systems
• military ethics
• military innovation
• trusted autonomous systems
• military culture

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. The difference is even more stark in the ADF Reserve forces, where only 20% of personnel are between 18 and 29.

2. It is worth noting that among Junior Officers in the ADF (which is the closest comparable group to the respondents) 21.5% are female.

3. The Martens Clause requires that the legality of new weapon systems be subject to the principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience in cases that are not covered by established international law – ICRC (2014).

4. The hypothetical “potentially lethal robots” had the following levels of autonomous capability: A: need a human operator to control every function of the system B: human operators control, but which can independently perform some preprogramed functions C: can exercise preprogramed “decision making” in determining how to employ force in predefined areas without the need for direct human oversight D: can imitate human-level decision making ability to create and complete its own tasks in any environment without the need for any human input, learning from its mistakes

5. “Killer robots are fully autonomous weapon systems. These are weapons that operate without meaningful human control, meaning that the weapon itself can take decisions about where and how it is used; what or whom it is used against; and the effects of use.” – (Acheson 2019).

6. “A fully autonomous Lethal Autonomous Weapon System (LAWS) is a weapon delivery platform that is able to independently analyse its environment and make an active decision whether to fire without human supervision or guidance.” – (Wyatt 2020).

7. The question presented to respondents was: Who do you think should be held responsible for an error that occurs in an autonomous system that can exercise preprogramed “decision making” in determining how to employ force in predefined areas, whilst operating in a predefined area in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions? Rank the following from most responsible (1) to somewhat responsible (7).

Additional information

Funding

“This research was supported by the Australian Government through a grant by the Australian Department of Defence. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and are not nec-essarily those of the Australian Government or the Australian Department of Defence.”.

Notes on contributors

Jai Galliott

Dr Jai Galliott is Group Leader of Values in Defence & Security Technology at the Australian Defence Force Academy at the University of New South Wales. He is a defence analyst and expert on the ethical, legal and strategic issues associated with the employment of emerging technologies, including cyber systems, autonomous vehicles and soldier augmentation.

Austin Wyatt

Austin Wyatt is a Research Associate in the Values in Defence & Security Technology group at The University of New South Wales at the Australian Defence Force Academy. His research concerns autonomous weapons, with a particular emphasis on their disruptive effects in Southeast Asia.