AI-Powered Autonomous Weapons Risk Geopolitical Instability and Threaten AI Research (2405.01859v2)

Abstract: The recent embrace of ML in the development of autonomous weapons systems (AWS) creates serious risks to geopolitical stability and the free exchange of ideas in AI research. This topic has received comparatively little attention of late compared to risks stemming from superintelligent artificial general intelligence (AGI), but requires fewer assumptions about the course of technological development and is thus a nearer-future issue. ML is already enabling the substitution of AWS for human soldiers in many battlefield roles, reducing the upfront human cost, and thus political cost, of waging offensive war. In the case of peer adversaries, this increases the likelihood of "low intensity" conflicts which risk escalation to broader warfare. In the case of non-peer adversaries, it reduces the domestic blowback to wars of aggression. This effect can occur regardless of other ethical issues around the use of military AI such as the risk of civilian casualties, and does not require any superhuman AI capabilities. Further, the military value of AWS raises the specter of an AI-powered arms race and the misguided imposition of national security restrictions on AI research. Our goal in this paper is to raise awareness among the public and ML researchers on the near-future risks posed by full or near-full autonomy in military technology, and we provide regulatory suggestions to mitigate these risks. We call upon AI policy experts and the defense AI community in particular to embrace transparency and caution in their development and deployment of AWS to avoid the negative effects on global stability and AI research that we highlight here.

Understanding AI-Powered Autonomous Weapons Systems and Their Implications

Overview of Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS)

AWS are essentially systems enabled by machine learning to perform military functions with minimal human intervention. This encompasses diverse technologies like drones, unmanned vehicles, and automated surveillance systems. These have already been deployed in various military scenarios and are under rapid development to enhance functionalities like target acquisition and strike capabilities without direct human control. Recent advancements have stirred significant concerns regarding the social, ethical, and geopolitical ramifications of these technologies.

Implications for Geopolitical Stability

Deploying AWS can drastically reduce the human cost of conflict, which might make engaging in warfare a more appealing option for states. Here’s how that plays out:

• Reduced Barrier to Conflict: With fewer lives on the line, governments may face less domestic pushback against military interventions, potentially leading to an increase in the frequency of armed conflicts.
• Escalations in Low-Intensity Conflicts: As AWS can engage without risking human soldiers, there's a possibility of more frequent low-intensity conflicts that could escalate into larger wars.
• Risk of Arms Races: The strategic advantage provided by AWS might lead nations into an arms race, striving to outpace each other in developing more sophisticated unmanned systems.

Ethical and Operational Challenges

AWS present several ethical challenges, particularly in relation to compliant warfare and the preservation of human life:

• Accountability and Transparency: Automated systems complicate accountability, especially when errors occur, such as wrongful targeting or civilian casualties.
• Human Out of the Loop: The concept of reducing human intervention in the decision-making loop of lethal actions is fraught with ethical quandaries, particularly concerning the respect for and value of human life.
• Rules of Engagement: Adhering to international laws and rules of warfare becomes complex when decisions are outsourced to algorithms, which may not be capable of nuanced decision-making in complex scenarios.

Impact on AI Research and Development

The integration of AI into military operations doesn't just transform the battlefield; it also has profound implications for the field of AI itself:

• Convergence of Military and Civilian Research: There's an increasing risk of military priorities influencing AI research agendas, which could steer the research community away from open, collaborative innovations towards more secretive, defense-oriented projects.
• Restrictions and Monitoring: Heightened military interest in AI can lead to national security measures that might restrict research freedoms by classifying certain areas of AI research or imposing stringent controls on the sharing of AI technologies and methodologies.

Future Directions and Necessary Actions

Given these challenges, it is essential for policymakers, researchers, and the global community to take a measured approach to the development and deployment of AWS:

1. Regulatory Frameworks: Establish clear laws and international agreements that outline permissible actions and set strict boundaries for autonomous operations in military contexts.
2. Transparency and Accountability Measures: Ensure that AWS deployments are transparent and that there are robust mechanisms in place to hold parties accountable for the systems' actions.
3. Safeguarding Research Integrity: Strive towards an ethical consensus in the AI research community about the dual-use nature of AI technologies and upholding norms that prevent the militarization of AI research.

Conclusion

The future trajectory of AWS is not just a technological or military issue but a significant societal concern that needs comprehensive strategies to address potential risks. Broadly, this involves a tightrope walk between leveraging technological advances to ensure national security and upholding ethical standards that respect human rights and international law. As these systems become more capable, the decisions we make now will shape the norms and expectations for the future of warfare and international relations.