How (not) to stop the killer robots: A comparative analysis of humanitarian disarmament campaign strategies

Reference list

• Altmann, J. (2004). Military uses of nanotechnology: Perspectives and concerns. Security Dialogue, 35(1), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010604042536
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altmann, J., & Sauer, F. (2017). Autonomous weapons systems and strategic stability. Survival, 59(5), 117–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2017.1375263
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amoroso, D., Sauer, F., Sharkey, N., Suchman, L., & Tamburrini, G. (2018). Autonomy in weapon systems: The military application of artificial intelligence as a litmus test for Germany’s new foreign and security policy (Boell Foundation Task Force Report). https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/boell_autonomy-in-weapon-systems_1.pdf?dimension1=division_oen
   Google Scholar
• Anderberg, B., Bring, O., & Wolbarsht, M. L. (1992). Blinding laser weapons and international humanitarian law. Journal of Peace Research, 29(3), 287–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343392029003005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Article 36. (2016). Key elements of meaningful human control. Background Paper April 2016. http://www.article36.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/MHC-2016-FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Asaro, P. (2012). 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asaro, P. (2019). Algorithms of violence: Critical social perspectives on autonomous weapons. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 86(2), 537–555.
   Google Scholar
• Barbé, E., & Badell, D. (2019). The European Union and lethal autonomous weapons systems: United in diversity? In E. Johansson-Nogués, M. Vlaskamp, & E. Barbé (Eds.), European Union contested. Foreign policy in a new global context (pp. 133–152). Springer Link.
   Google Scholar
• Bloodgood, E. A. (2011). The interest group analogy: International non-governmental advocacy organisations in international politics. Review of International Studies, 37(1), 93–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210510001051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bob, C. (2002). Merchants of morality. Foreign Policy, 129(129), 36–45. https://doi.org/10.2307/3183388
   Google Scholar
• Bode, I. (2019). Norm-making and the global south: Attempts to regulate lethal autonomous weapons systems. Global Policy, 10(3), 359–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12684
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bode, I., & Huelss, H. (2018). Autonomous weapons systems and changing norms in international relations. Review of International Studies, 44(3), 393–413. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210517000614
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolton, M. B., & Mitchell, C. C. (2020). When scientists become activists: The international committee for robot arms control and the politics of killer robots. In M. B. Bolton, S. Njeri, & T. Benjamin-Britton (Eds.), Global activism and humanitarian disarmament (pp. 27–58). Springer Link.
   Google Scholar
• Bolton, M., & Nash, T. (2010). The role of middle power-NGO coalitions in global policy: The case of the cluster munitions ban. Global Policy, 1(2), 172–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-5899.2009.00015.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrie, J. (2009). Unacceptable harm: A history of how the treaty to ban cluster munitions was won. UNIDIR.
   Google Scholar
• Bower, A. (2015). Norms without the great powers: International law, nested social structures, and the ban on antipersonnel mines. International Studies Review, 17(3), 347–373. https://doi.org/10.1111/misr.12225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brehm, M. (2017). Defending the boundary. Constraints and requirements on the use of autonomous weapons systems under international humanitarian law and human rights law. Academy Briefing Nr 9, Geneva Academy of International Law and Human Rights. https://www.geneva-academy.ch/joomlatools-files/docman-files/Briefing9_interactif.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. (2019a). Key elements of a treaty on fully autonomous weapons. https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Key-Elements-of-a-Treaty-on-Fully-Autonomous-WeaponsvAccessible.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. (2019c). High-level concerns on killer robots at UN. https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/2019/10/unga74/
   Google Scholar
• Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. (2019d). New European poll shows public favour banning killer robots. https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/2019/11/new-european-poll-shows-73-favour-banning-killer-robots
   Google Scholar
• Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. (2020). Country views on killer robots. https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/KRC_CountryViews_11Mar2020.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Campaign to Stop Killer Robots [@BanKillerRobots]. (2019b, April 12). We’re going to be doing all we can to foster greater understanding about the serious threats posed by #killerrobots+find the political support, political leadership that we need to lead us forward. Campaign Coordinator @marywareham at the end of the #CCWUN. #FridayThoughts [Tweet]. Twitter. https://twitter.com/BanKillerRobots/status/1116621640316493827
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter, R. C. (2011). Vetting the advocacy agenda: Network centrality and the paradox of weapons norms. International Organization, 65(1), 69–102. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818310000329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter, R. C. (2014). “Lost” causes. Agenda vetting in global issue networks and the shaping of human security. Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• CCW. (2019, November, 13–15). Meeting of the high contracting parties to the convention on prohibitions or restrictions on the use of certain conventional weapons which may be deemed to be excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate effects (Revised draft final report). https://www.unog.ch/80256EDD006B8954/(httpAssets)/815F8EE33B64DADDC12584B7004CF3A4/$file/CCW+MSP+2019+CRP.2+Rev+1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• CDU, CSU, & SPD. (2013). Deutschlands Zukunft gestalten. Koalitionsvertrag zwischen CDU, CSU und SPD. 18. Legislaturperiode. https://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/2013/2013-12-17-koalitionsvertrag.pdf?__blob=publicationFile
   Google Scholar
• CDU, CSU, & SPD. (2018). Ein neuer Aufbruch für Europa. Eine neue Dynamik für Deutschland. Ein neuer Zusammenhalt für unser Land. Koalitionsvertrag zwischen CDU, CSU und SPD. 19. Legislaturperiode. https://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/2018/03/2018-03-14-koalitionsvertrag.pdf;jsessionid=BF811261654CE0C506DAA798D43BDDB3.s6t1?__blob=publicationFile&v=6
   Google Scholar
• Chengeta, T. (2016). Measuring autonomous weapon systems against international humanitarian law rules. Journal of Law and Cyber Warfare, 5(1), 66–146. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2755184
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, K. P. (2013). Locating norm diplomacy: Venue change in international norm negotiations. European Journal of International Relations, 19(1), 163–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066111411209
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, N. (2011). Humanitarian arms control and processes of securitization: Moving weapons along the security continuum. Contemporary Security Policy, 32(1), 134–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2011.556855
   Google Scholar
• Cottrell, M. P. (2009). Legitimacy and institutional replacement: The convention on certain conventional weapons and the emergence of the mine ban treaty. International Organization, 63(2), 217–248. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818309090079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford, N. C. (2002). Argument and change in world politics: Ethics, decolonization, and humanitarian intervention. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Davis Gibbons, R. (2018). The humanitarian turn in nuclear disarmament and the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons. The Non-Proliferation Review, 25(1/2), 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10736700.2018.1486960
   Google Scholar
• Deitelhoff, N., & Müller, H. (2005). Theoretical paradise – empirically lost? Arguing with Habermas. Review of International Studies, 31(1), 167–179. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210505006364
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Larrinaga, M., & Sjolander, C. T. (1998). (Re)presenting landmines from protector to enemy: The discursive framing of a new multilateralism. In M. A. Cameron, R. J. Lawson, & B. W. Tomlin (Eds.), To walk without fear: The global movement to ban landmines (pp. 364–391). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Defense. (2017). Directive 3000.09: Autonomy in weapon systems.
   Google Scholar
• Docherty, B. (2015). Mind the gap: The lack of accountability for Killer Robots. https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/arms04l5_ForUploadO.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Dolan, M., & Hunt, C. (1998). Negotiating in the Ottawa process: The new multilateralism. In M. A. Cameron, R. J. Lawson, & B. W. Tomlin (Eds.), To walk without fear: The global movement to ban landmines (pp. 392–423). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, M., & Breen, L. (2019). Targeting lethal weapons. Issue-adoption and campaign structure in transnational disarmament campaigns (EUI Working Paper RSCAS 2019/89).
   Google Scholar
• Fehl, C. (2014). Unequal power and the institutional design of global governance: The case of arms control. Review of International Studies, 40(3), 505–531. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026021051300034X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fehl, C., & Freistein, K. (2020). (Un)making global inequalities: International institutions in a stratified international society. Journal of International Relations and Development, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-020-00190-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550789
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Future of Life Institute. (2015). Autonomous weapons: An Open Letter from AI & robotics researchers. https://futureoflife.org/open-letter-autonomous-weapons
   Google Scholar
• Garcia, D. (2015). Humanitarian security regimes. International Affairs, 91(1), 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia, D. (2016). Future arms, technologies, and international law: Preventive security governance. European Journal of International Security, 1(1), 94–111. https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2015.7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillow, T. (1995). Another weapon too far: The anti-personnel laser. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 88, 347–349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haas, M. C., & Fischer, S.-C. (2017). The evolution of targeted killing practices: Autonomous weapons, future conflict, and the international order. Contemporary Security Policy, 38(2), 281–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2017.1336407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanson, M. (2018). Normalizing zero nuclear weapons: The humanitarian road to the prohibition treaty. Contemporary Security Policy, 39(3), 464–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2017.1421344
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heyns, C. (2016). Human rights and the use of autonomous weapons systems (AWS) during domestic law enforcement. Human Rights Quarterly, 38(2), 350–378. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2016.0034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horowitz, M. C. (2019). When speed kills: Lethal autonomous weapon systems, deterrence and stability. Journal of Strategic Studies, 42(6), 764–788. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2019.1621174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Human Rights Watch & International Human Rights Clinic. (2016). Killer robots and the concept of meaningful human control. Memorandum to Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) Delegates April 2016. https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/supporting_resources/robots_meaningful_human_control_final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• ICRC. (1994). Report of the international committee of the red cross for the review conference of the 1980 United Nations convention on prohibitions or restrictions on the use of certain conventional weapons which may be deemed to be excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate effects. International Review of the Red Cross, 34(299), 123–158. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020860400078311
   Google Scholar
• ICRC. (2016). Autonomous weapon systems. Implications of increasing autonomy in the critical functions of weapons. https://shop.icrc.org/autonomous-weapon-systems.html?___store=default
   Google Scholar
• ICRC. (2018, April). Ethics and autonomous weapon systems: An ethical basis for human control? (ICRC Report). https://www.icrc.org/en/document/ethics-and-autonomous-weapon-systems-ethical-basis-human-control.
   Google Scholar
• ICRC. (2019). Autonomy, artificial intelligence and robotics: Technical aspects of human control. https://www.icrc.org/en/download/file/102852/autonomy_artificial_intelligence_and_robotics.pdf
   Google Scholar
• iPRAW. (2019). Focus on human control (iPRAW Report No. 5). International Panel on the Regulation of Autonomous Weapons. https://www.ipraw.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/2019-08-09_iPRAW_HumanControl.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders. Advocacy networks in international politics. Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maas, M. M. (2019). How viable is international arms control for military artificial intelligence? Three lessons from nuclear weapons. Contemporary Security Policy, 40(3), 285–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2019.1576464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marshall, J. (1997). Blinding laser weapons: Still available on the battlefield. British Medical Journal, 315(7120), 1392–1392. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7120.1392
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maslen, S. (2001). Anti-personnel mines under humanitarian law: A view from the vanishing point. Intersentia.
   Google Scholar
• Mathur, R. (2012). Practices of legalization in arms control and disarmament: The ICRC, CCW and landmines. Contemporary Security Policy, 33(3), 413–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2012.727678
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, M. (2015). The new killer drones: Understanding the strategic implications of next-generation unmanned combat aerial vehicles. International Affairs, 91(4), 765–780. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morton, J. S. (1998). The legal status of laser weapons that blind. Journal of Peace Research, 35(6), 697–705. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343398035006003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parks, W. H. (2006). Means and methods of warfare. George Washington International Law Review, 38(3), 511–539.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, A. (1996). Blinding laser weapons: New limits on the technology of warfare. International and Comparative Law Review, 18(4), 733–766.
   Google Scholar
• Petrova, M. H. (2016). Rhetorical entrapment and normative enticement: How the United Kingdom turned from spoiler into champion of the cluster munition ban. International Studies Quarterly, 60(3), 387–399. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqv013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrova, M. H. (2018). Weapons prohibitions through immanent critique: NGOs as emancipatory and (de)securitising actors in security governance. Review of International Studies, 44(4), 619–653. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026021051800013X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrova, M. H. (2019). Naming and praising in humanitarian norm development. World Politics, 71(03), 586–630. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004388711800031X
   Google Scholar
• Price, R. (1995). A genealogy of the chemical weapons taboo. International Organization, 49(1), 73–103. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300001582
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price, R. (1998). Reversing the gun sights: Transnational civil society targets land mines. International Organization, 52(3), 613–644. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550671
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roff, H. (2016). Weapon autonomy is rocketing. http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/28/weapons-autonomy-is-rocketing/.
   Google Scholar
• Rosert, E. (2017). How to regulate autonomous weapons. Steps to codify meaningful human control as a principle of international humanitarian law. https://www.hsfk.de/fileadmin/HSFK/hsfk_publikationen/Spotlight0617.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rosert, E. (2019a). Norm emergence as agenda diffusion: Failure and success in the regulation of cluster munitions. European Journal of International Relations, 25(4), 1103–1131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066119842644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosert, E. (2019b). Salience and the emergence of international norms: Napalm and cluster munitions in the inhumane weapons convention. Review of International Studies, 45(1), 77–99. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210518000232
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosert, E., & Sauer, F. (2019). Prohibiting autonomous weapons: Put human dignity first. Global Policy, 10(3), 370–375. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12691
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutherford, K. R. (2011). Disarming states: The international movement to ban landmines. Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Sauer, F. (2015). Atomic anxiety. Deterrence, taboo and the non-use of U.S. nuclear weapons. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Sauer, F. (2016). Stopping ‘killer robots’: Why now is the time to ban autonomous weapons systems. Arms Control Today, 46(8), 8–13.
   Google Scholar
• Sauer, F., & Schörnig, N. (2012). Killer drones: The ‘silver bullet’ of democratic warfare. Security Dialogue, 43(4), 363–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010612450207
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scharre, P. (2018). Army of none: Autonomous weapons and the future of war. W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Sharkey, A. (2019). Autonomous weapons systems, killer robots and human dignity. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(2), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9494-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharkey, N. E. (2012). The evitability of autonomous robot warfare. International Review of the Red Cross, 94(886), 787–799. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383112000732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tannenwald, N. (2007). The nuclear taboo: The United States and the non-use of nuclear weapons since 1945. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, N. (2018). Emmanuel Macron talks to WIRED about France’s AI strategy. https://www.wired.com/story/emmanuel-macron-talks-to-wired-about-frances-ai-strategy/
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. (1995). United Nations juridical handbook 1995.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. (2019). Autonomous weapons that kill must be banned, insists UN chief. https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/03/1035381
   Google Scholar
• Van Rompaey, L. (2019). Shifting from autonomous weapons to military networks. Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies, 10(1), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1163/18781527-01001011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youngblood, N. (2006). The development of mine warfare: A most murderous and barbarous conduct. Praeger.
   Google Scholar