Rights Groups Call for Ban on Futuristic Killer Robots
by Thalif Deen For Inter Press Service
Monday, November 19, 2012
The predator drone – an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) – is
one of the relatively new lethal weapons used by the United
States for targeted killings of suspected terrorists,
particularly in Pakistan , Afghanistan , Yemen
and Somalia .
But the weapon has increasingly come under fire because of
the collateral damage in the spillover killings of innocent civilians,
including women and children. On Monday, a report jointly published by Human
Rights Watch (HRW) and Harvard
Law School ’s
International Human Rights Clinic (IHRC) has warned of an even more deadly
weapon: killer robots. Described as fully autonomous, these weapons will have
the capability to select and fire on targets without human intervention in
future wars. The primary concern of HRW and IHRC is the impact fully autonomous
weapons would have on the protection of civilians during times of war. In the
report released Monday, they called on governments to pre-emptively ban these
yet-to-be deployed weapons because of the danger they pose to civilians in
armed conflict.
Asked how feasible it was to garner support at the United
Nations for an international convention to ban such killer robots, Steve Goose,
arms division director at Human Rights Watch, told IPS that many governments
are not yet aware of the status of development of, and plans to produce fully
autonomous weapons systems. So, a good deal of education needs to be done, he said.
“But we are convinced that the obvious and undeniable inconsistency of these
future weapons with existing international humanitarian law, and the degree to
which they will be repugnant to the public conscience, will make an
international prohibition on killer robots achievable in the near term,” said
Goose. Asked how drones differ from fully autonomous weapons, Goose said drones
have a “man in the loop” – a human has remote control, a human selects the
target and decides when to fire the weapon.
The 50-page report titled “Losing Humanity: The Case Against
Killer Robots” expresses concern over these fully autonomous weapons, which
would inherently lack human qualities that provide legal and non-legal
cheques on the killing of civilians. In addition, the obstacles to holding
anyone accountable for harm caused by the weapons would weaken the law’s power
to deter future violations. “Giving machines the power to decide who lives and
dies on the battlefield would take technology too far,” said Goose, pointing
out that human control of robotic warfare is essential to minimising civilian
deaths and injuries. Fully autonomous weapons do not yet exist, and major
powers, including the United
States , have not made a decision to deploy
them, according to the report. However,
the most high-tech militaries are developing or have already deployed
precursors that illustrate the push toward greater autonomy for machines on the
battlefield, it said. The United States
is a leader in the technological development of killer robots, while several
other countries, including China ,
Germany , Israel , South
Korea , Russia ,
and the United Kingdom
have also been involved. “Many experts predict that full autonomy for weapons
could be achieved in 20 to 30 years, and some think even sooner,” HRW said. Both
HRW and IHRC Monday called for an international treaty that would absolutely
prohibit the development, production, and use of fully autonomous weapons. They
also called on individual nations to pass laws and adopt policies as important
measures to prevent development, production, and use of such weapons at the
domestic level.
Asked what weapons are currently banned under international
conventions, Goose told IPS that banned weapons include poison gas, chemical
and biological weapons, blinding lasers, antipersonnel mines, and cluster
munitions. The 1995 ban on blinding lasers (spearheaded by the International
Committee of the Red Cross and Human Rights Watch) is a key example of banning
a weapon before it was widely produced or fielded by armed forces – a pre-emptive
ban such as HRW and others are aiming for with fully autonomous weapons, Goose
said. The report analyses whether the technology would comply with
international humanitarian law and preserve other cheques on the killing of civilians.
But it finds that fully autonomous weapons would not only be unable to meet
legal standards but would also undermine essential non-legal safeguards for
civilians. “Our research and analysis strongly conclude that fully autonomous
weapons should be banned and that governments should urgently pursue that end,”
the report says.
No comments:
Post a Comment