Regulating Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS).pptx

The practice of using Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems has given rise to examine the legality of use of such weapons under the international humanitarian law. This is the aim of this presentation.

1. " Regulating Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS)"

2. PRESENTATION by Maj Gen Nilendra Kumar Executive President, Indian Society of International Law

3. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE It is the intelligence of machines or software as opposed to intelligence of humans or animals.

4. AUTONOMOUS WEAPONS are Those able to select and engage target without meaningful human controls. They select and engage targets without human intervention.

5. AUTONOMY except that A human gives the final command to engage. There are also those which are defensive systems.

6. AWS provide o perational f lexibility in air, underwater, land or outer space

7. AUTONOMOUS WEAPONS Have autonomy to execute their functions in the absence of direction or input from a human actor.

8. LAWS (Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems). P re-programmed to kill a specific target profile. It is then deployed where it searches for that target profile, using sensor data, such as facial recognition. Thus it identifies, selects and kills human targets without human intervention.

9. ATTACK KILL CHAIN Find Fix Track Target Engage Assess

10. INDIA is known to have already started requiring and deploying near autonomous weapon systems.

11. ADVANTAGES FOR INDIA Diverse and tough terrain may favour employment of ALS for border patrolling and protection of space assets.

12. CONCERNS about use of such weapons reflect humanitarian , legal , ethical & security issues.

13. LEGAL ISSUES How would the culpability be fixed in case of wrongful death or large damages? 2. Would the actions be viewed as deliberate or omissions ?

14. TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES 1. Differentiation between civilians and non-civilians. 2. Proportionality

15. AP1 Article 36-New weapons In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, a High Contracting Party is under an obligation to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by this Protocol or by any other rule of international law applicable to the High Contracting Party.

16. IHL PROVISIONS LIKELY TO BE INFRINGED API Art 48. shall all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives.

17. Article 51-Protection of the civilian population. 51(1). The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations. (2) and (3). XXX 4. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited.

18. Article 52- General protection of civilian objects 52(1). Civilian objects shall not be the object of attack or of reprisals. Civilian objects are all objects which are not military objectives as defined in paragraph 2. Article 57-Precautions in attack 57 (1). In the conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and objects.

19. Algorithms based on long standing instances of 1.Air bases used for particular type of missions. 2.Railway stations used for troop or stores movements. 3.Particular weapons carried by reconnecting patrols. 4.Usual deployments for a bridge head or breakout phase. 5.Reaction time taken for combat air patrols

20. PRINCIPLES OF WAR WHICH IMPEDE PREDICTABILITY 1.Surprise. 2.Security 3.Flexibility 4.Cooperation

21. SADDLE RESPONSIBLITY ON 1. Commander, or 2. Operator

22. MAJOR CHALLENGE 1. Absence of meaningful human control (MHC). 2. Hard to identify which particular technologies have the potential capacity for military use. 3. Rather than regulating the development of autonomous weapons focus on regulating their use. 4. Increasing likelihood of use of such weapons in offensive roles.