The Moral Case Against Autonomous and Semiautonomous UAVs

Reference work entry

Abstract

Robots in warfare are an inevitable stage in the evolution of weapon development designed to separate fighters from their foes. Weapon technology has evolved to enable killing from ever-increasing distances throughout the history of warfare. From stones to pole weapons to bows and arrow cannon to aerial bombing to cruise missiles, killing has become ever easier. Battlefield robots may not change the character of war, but they will change the way that wars are fought. The focus of this chapter accordingly is on ethical concerns about the application of armed robots in areas with mixed combatant and civilian populations. It is unclear whether international humanitarian law (the Laws of War) will eventually need to be amended to accommodate emerging technologies. But for now one must scrutinize the mapping between the applications of the new technology and the current laws to ensure that those laws are preserved and followed.

Keywords

United Nations Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Moral Disengagement Autonomous Robot Geneva Convention 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. P. Alston, Report of the special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Philip Alston to the UN Human Rights Council, Fourteenth session, A/HRC/14/24/Add.6, 28 May 2010 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. K. Anderson, Written testimony to the US House of representatives committee on oversight and government reform, Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee Hearing: “Drones II”, 28 Apr 2010Google Scholar
  3. B. Chakwin, D. Voelkel, S. Enright, Leaders as targets, Joint Forces Staff College, Seminar # 08 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. Committee on Autonomous Vehicles in Support of Naval Operations National Research Council, Autonomous Vehicles in Support of Naval Operations (The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2005)Google Scholar
  5. M.L. Cumming, Automation and accountability in decision support system interface design. J. Technol. Stud. 32(1), 23–31 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. A. Daddis, Understanding fear's effect on unit effectiveness. Mil. Rev. 84, 22–27 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. W.J.A. Dahm, “Technology Horizons”: A Vision for Air Force Science & Technology, vol. 1, AF/ST-TR-10-01 (2010), http://www.airforce-magazine.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/TheDocumentFile/StrategyandConcepts/TechnologyHorizonsVol1_2010.pdf. Last accessed 14 Oct 2010
  8. D. Davis, Who decides: man or machine? Armed Forces J. (2008)Google Scholar
  9. DoD, DoD Press briefing with Mr. Weatherington from the Pentagon briefing room. US Department of Defense, 18 Dec 2007, www.defenselink.mil/transcriptstranscript.aspx?transcriptid=4108
  10. J.S. Ford, The Morality of Obliteration Bombing (Theological Studies, Woodstock, NY: Theological Studies, 1944), pp. 261–309Google Scholar
  11. D. Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society (Little, Brown and Co., Boston, 1995)Google Scholar
  12. S.M. Hersh, Manhunt: the Bush administration's new strategy in the war against terrorism. New Yorker 66 (23 Dec 2002)Google Scholar
  13. R. Holmes, Acts of War: The Behaviour of Men in Battle (Cassell, London, 2003)Google Scholar
  14. H. Koh, Speech to the American Society of International Law, Washington, DC, 25 Mar 2010Google Scholar
  15. S. Lindlaw, UAV operators suffer war stress. Air Force Times (2008), http://www.airforcetimes. com/news/2008/08/apremote stress 080708/. Last accessed 10 Oct 2010
  16. S.L.A. Marshall, Men Against Fire: The Problem of Battle Command (First published by William Morrow & Company, 1947). (Reprinted: Oklahoma University Press, Norman, 2000)Google Scholar
  17. NAF, The year of the drones, New America Foundation website (2010), http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/drones. Last accessed 15 Oct 2010
  18. L.E. Panetta, Director's remarks at the Pacific Council on international policy (2008), https://www.cia.gov/news-information/speeches- testimony/directors-remarks- at-pacific-council.html. Last accessed 15 Oct 2010
  19. L. Royakkers, R. van Est, The cubicle warrior: the marionette of digitalized warfare. Ethics Inf. Technol. 12, 289–296 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. N. Sharkey, Cassandra or the false prophet of doom: AI robots and war. IEEE Intell. Syst. 23(4), 14-17 (2008a). JulyAugust IssueCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. N. Sharkey, Grounds for discrimination: autonomous robot weapons. RUSI Def. Syst. 11(2), 86-89 (2008b)Google Scholar
  22. N. Sharkey, The ethical frontiers of robotics. Science 322, 1800–1801 (2008c)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. N. Sharkey, Death strikes from the sky: the calculus of proportionality. IEEE Sci. Soc. 28, 16-19 (2009). SpringGoogle Scholar
  24. P.W. Singer, Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century (The Penguin Press, New York, 2009)Google Scholar
  25. R. Sparrow, Killer robots. J. Appl. Philos. 24, 62–77 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. J. Stein, CIA drones could be grounded by software suit, Washington Post, SpyTalk, 11 Oct (2010), http://blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/10/cia_drones_could_be_grounded_b.html. Last accessed 14 Oct 2010
  27. N. Turse, Drone surge: today, tomorrow and 2047. Asia Times (2010). http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LA26Df01.html. Last accessed 15 Oct 2010
  28. USAF, United States Air Force Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight Plan 2009–2047 (Headquarters of the United States Air Force, Washington, DC, 2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Taylor and Francis 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations