The Ethical Implications Surrounding the Use of Automated Robots - Research Paper Example

? Evaluation of the ethical implications surrounding the use of automated robots in the modern warfare. To what extent should robots be utilized in the battlefield? Abstract Technological advancement has led to widespread use of automated robots in the modern warfare. This paper explores unprecedented widespread use of automated robots for both intelligence gathering and destroying of the perceived enemies in relation to the ethical implications. In addition, it surveys the use of automated robots in war because this is the area that has been very controversial regarding their usage. This paper reviews the unethical implications related to the use of these lethal weaponry. It provides a platform of reasoning for the policy makers, the political class, military personnel, scientists and the general public on the impending consequences of replacing humans in war with robots. It evaluates both the adverse effects of rapid change from humans to remote controlled robots and lately, to automated robots capable of sensing, hearing, communicating, acting and the extend of their necessities. In the evaluation and analysis, the review attempts to center around the ethical implications surrounding usage of automated robots in the modern warfare. Introduction and background The use of automated robots has a long history which began in the late 1980s when researchers got involved in the investigations on the use of multiple mobile robot systems. Previously, most researchers have carried out research which mainly concentrated on distributed problem solving mechanism. The main areas of concern by then were multi- robot motion plan, architectures for multi- robot cooperation and cellular robot system. Humanoid robots were first used in factories. They were capable to carry out production work without human assistance. The use of mobile and remote controlled robots in the military began back during the World War II and the cold war. The Germans through Goliath tracked mines and Soviet teletanks (a soviet built robot tanker) were used. The predator planes or drones were first used by the CIA officials in collection of intelligence in a fantasy environment. The aerial robots could collect intelligence for the military officials. Traditionally, robots were regarded as a topic for fiction by scientists in warfare. The modern concept of use of robots in the warfare began to develop with the use of mechanics and the introduction of electrical power. As time went on and many soldiers lost their lives in the battle field, there arose need to automate robots so that they could take the role of humans. This was after the rise of issues of human rights in the 1920s, although with concern and focus on the aggressor. This is the time that humanoid machines were developed and the myth of use of robots forgotten. It was now a reality (Parker 1-10). Robots are now gaining momentum in the modern warfare, although their use dates far back in the 19th century. Automated robots are proving to be efficient in the battle field as they reduce human loses and can easily penetrate in dangerous zones and perform effective and efficient. It is now common that robots in form of unmanned air vehicles are widely used by the US in destroying their enemies. This is evident in the Middle East wars, for instance Iraq, Afghanistan and collection of intelligence in South Korea among other regions of the world. Today, the drones used in war are controlled by pilots on the ground but with technological advancement, the pilots will be able to dial in when needed by the robots to take a specific action. The officer would be like managers in the future as robots undertake their roles. This trend of deploying autonomous robots in the battled field is quite worrying with regard to the ethical use of these systems in conflicts. This technological advancement generates more questions that are unanswered. The central question rests on the principle of discrimination of the combatant, non combatants and the organizational structure of the civil society. War is not supposed to dismantle these structures in the end so as to justify their usage. Methodology A review of the ethical implications on the use of automated robots in the modern warfare will involve surveying and analyzing the potential impacts of the robots as witnessed in the past wars where they have been used. The main point of focus revolves around ethical issues, social, economic and environmental factors. It will also include analyzing human rights issues related to automated robots being send to war, the laws of the war and rules of engagement. It will as well involve interviewing former military officer who have once used them in the war. The process will involve assessing of common technological failures associated with controlling of the robots and the impending consequences, if a malfunction does occur, on non combatant population. In addition, robot experts will also be interviewed to provide more information on the use of automated robots. This will include areas where automated robots have played a very important role and their adverse effects to human population especially, the non combatant and the officers operating them. A review on the use of automated robots in war environment According to the US department of defense 2007 p.19, the lethal robots are developed to replace human soldiers in dangerous and dirty operation that are carried out by the forces. This is because automated robots are resilient in very harsh conditions such as in the aftermath of a biochemical attack. Robots are able to survey an area that human have died carrying out a survey due to long-term effects of nuclear weapons. Robots stretch far beyond human endurance point and are not affected by emotions. This makes them very essential for long term surveillance and is not capable of mishandling civilian in the enemies’ territory due to feeling of avenging colleagues killed by the enemy fire. It is believed that robots are effective and efficient and capable of reducing unethical behavior of human during war time. This is another controversial statement presented by the US department of defense because robots have no feelings and therefore, replacing them in the battlefield against humans, is very dangerous to the opponent. It has to be clear where automated robots can be utilized under the law of war and engagement. It is a surprise that most available reports from the military robotics, on the use of unmanned systems doesn’t mention anything to do with ethics or risks associated with their use. This review is designed to bring to light the existing gap and come up with recommendations of addressing the gap (Lin, etal, 20-86). In the US for instance, the current fleet of drones (unmanned robotic aerial vehicles) are being overtaken by increasing demand for robots that are swifter, stealthier and smarter. They operate autonomously without human intervention. The US military department is investing heavily in the robotic weaponry that is autonomous. Researchers are anticipating the use of militarized robotics in the air, sea and water in form of autonomous drones that would work in collaboration with manned machines. It is believed that, drones and the manned machines work with minimized human supervision hence, capable of withstanding long term military patrols and surveillance. These robots are able to sense, communicate, make decision and respond appropriately including firing at the perceived enemy. According to the chief scientist for the US Air Force, the robotic technology in the military were blind, dumb and deaf but now they are capable of seeing, sensing and hearing. This is drastically altering the modern warfare as robots are instructed to fight humans. Question arises that, would robots be accountable to war crimes? Some schools of thought suggest that, the officer commanding them and the manufacturers ought to be accountable, but the robots as things stand currently are autonomous. On the contrary, they are also useful in some scenarios. Another question also arises that if a malfunction does occur what would be the effects to both the non combatant people in the war torn country and even the officers behind? Can they result into firing at anyone? These are some of the questions that need to be addressed by robotic experts involved in developing robots for military purposes. A small malfunction in this area would definitely result in unethical behavior because robots lack morals and cannot be compared to humans as much as they have their own advantages (Gonzalez et al.2-35). The US military personnel give a lot of credit to the capability of drones in disrupting the activities of the Al Qaeda leadership in the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan which is a very hard place to reach. The robots are also used on the ground to find and diffuse improvised explosives on the road sides making it easy for military officials on patrols. Envisioning the future conflicts, it is evident that automated robots would be at a great play yet they pose worrisome risks to humans and the environment in general. Singer Peter the director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative and senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brooking Institution in Washington. D.C, in his book, ‘Wired for War’, he studies the disturbing ethical implications of the rampant use of automated robots in the modern warfare (Singer.10-35). According to him, robotic war is a very open kind of war and that it must be noted that war is part of life as it keeps on erupting in various parts of the world. Another factor to worry about is that robotics systems for warfare are now commercialized and affordable. A combination of automated robots and terrorism puts individuals and states at a very dangerous zone because they make it easier for terrorists to attack. It is also noted that robots make it easier for the use of weapons of mass destruction with which there is no proper way to defend against. To this extend therefore, automated robots continue to burry ethical and moral considerations of warfare. This is because wars have rules of engagement but with increased terrorists, who don’t have regard for human life, make the whole thing a very deadly affair for every human and the environment. Deployment of robots in war rather than human beings make it possible for the superior military technologically to disregard the impacts and feelings of the others since they are not at risk. It would even enhance hegemonic behaviors and instead, increase terrorism activities. No one is safe as far as robots are deployed to war without specific international rules governing the use of automated robots in war. Use of robots by virtue of their efficiency, would polarize the world. People would now use robots to engager in a war just like movies. There would be no memories of those died in the war hence war monger states would not care about loses to others regarded as enemies because their joy is inflicting suffering to others. Drones as used by the US are not always productive, as fewer targets are identified and in the process they cause more harm to civilians than the real target. Aerial attacks by drones are not always productive as the end results when they hit a civilian population is radicalizing of the population and promoting terrorism to avenge against the easiest targets. In areas hit by such drones and target missed, it leads to everyone rising to arms and even joining the local militants. To this end therefore, has the technological advancement in the use of automated robots made the world peaceful? What if it’s now combatant automated robots only in the battle field? These are some of the questions to reflect upon in the use of robots. Robots don’t have psychological feeling, they are therefore, not overstretched and thus they can fight and fight. Although, they are good for patrols and providing intelligence as earlier seen. Use of robots may never make a soldier to ‘kill’ or be ‘killed’ and thus disregard the seriousness of the effects on the other party. It also reduces the ability of soldiers to discover new tricks in the battle field (Brown & Alan . 5). The enemy forces will always develop a way to counter the developments and this is much worse when such technological encounters are made by radicals involved in terrorism. This is because with technology, everything becomes possible and technology is ever advancing. The Geneva Convention on the laws of war and rules of engagement outline what is acceptable in the battle field at the global and local contexts. The law regulates the actions of armed hostilities and that’s why someone has to be accountable for war crimes. The law regulates infliction of unnecessary suffering to both the combats and non combatant. It also protects the destruction of civilian property and individuals not involved in the war. The adverts of autonomous robotic system are yet to bring to light how they intend to keep the requirements of this law in the advancement. The trend of lethality in the battlefield is currently being looked at differently than any other weapon. Propagators of these systems argue that, regardless, there has to be someone in the loop for the operation of these combatant robots against an identified enemy. At this point, the use of lethality is considered from a safety perspective instead of moral ones. Arguing from this point of view of autonomous robotic experts, at what point then is the human loop in necessary? Could it be prior to the deployment of the lethality for every engagement undertaken? Is it approved by the enforcers with respect to the laws of engagements that, it is a high risk mission that require whichever available force to save lives and prevent property destruction? It has been observed that, autonomous combatant robots have been deployed in the battle where humans are capable of handling the situation. This act makes it necessary to draw a clear line as to when such systems can be used and the aspect of the implication of ethical considerations. It is thought that in the automated robotic battlefield, the human soldiers will work hand in hand with the robots as opposed to the movie like scenarios where the robots are deployed to guard and even act by firing at the enemy (Coleman. 247-265). The robotic system have previously failed in the battlefield and thus creating concerns about their deployment in highly autonomous environment. The gap in the public domain especially from the human rights champions are yet to be filled. Reports from the deployment of robots armed with machine guns in Iraq by the US indicate that, it has resulted in malfunction of the robots acting fiercely towards friendly soldiers. In South Africa for instance, a semi autonomous robotic cannon by the military malfunctioned, killing nine friendly soldiers and wounding fourteen others. Communication constraints and other human errors have resulted in failures of several unmanned aerial vehicles. It is common that computer generated technology is prone to fail at some point and thus, it is expected that combatant robotic system would do the same because they use related technology. Reports from the battlefield have indicated that human soldiers have acted in disregard to the ethical consideration of a conflict. This is because of stress and overreactions to emotions. Although, autonomous robots don’t have emotions, this might also lead them to act against the laws of engagement. Interviews with returning US soldiers and marines from combat in Iraq reveal that even the soldiers believe that non combatants ought to be treated with respect and dignity. This is because they are humans and not involved in the conflict directly. There is some intelligence that can only be gathered through direct interaction with the local population which cannot be done fully by the robots. Although robots do gather intelligence, they don’t do it accurately. In the past, evidence gathered and relied upon for aerial attacks has resulted into unnecessary destruction and loss of civilians. This is in violation of the ethics of engagements as outlined by the Geneva Convention on the rules of law. War atrocities have occurred in the past and thus, it’s wrong to assume that autonomous robotic systems would ultimately bring this to the end (Lin Patrick etal. 11-16). Unmanned aerial vehicles rely on satellite communications for their execution of missions and constant input. If this communication does not materialize as expected, then the results cannot be easily explained because robots are machines. There are many issues regarding the safety of robot usage. For instance, how would a robot behave when it is hacked or reprogrammed in the event of capture in the battlefield? Automated robots create ethical risks that go beyond specified harm to societal and cultural apart from laws of war. Current developments have led to creation of autonomous robots that can sense and assess the situation before firing; what will happen or rather who will be responsible if such mechanized robots refuse to take actions? These are some of the considerations to be looked into while designing robots because they are also useful in some scenarios. Conclusion Technological advancement especially in the field of military has resulted in the development of automated robotic systems which are deployed in the battlefield. The automated robots have been successful in form of unmanned aerial vehicles in intelligence collection and bombing suspected enemies in highly dangerous environments. But they have less regard to the ethics of war which includes the laws of war and rules of engagement. Deploying of robots to the battle frontline is immoral and insensitive as they would kill people without feeling anything. This would instead increase radicalism as the affected families would take up arms and even join local militants. Ability of the robots is undoubtedly massive and therefore, if such automated robots get into the hands of terrorists, then there would be no peace at all. This is because robots are capable of handling and disposing weapons of mass destruction. This also makes it hard to hold anyone accountable because the modern autonomous robots are capable of making decisions including firing at a specified target. As much as robots can be essential in intelligence collection and monitoring highly dangerous zones, there are still gaps that need to be filled by robot experts. Robots can turn against non combatant civilian and even friendly soldiers killing them when a malfunction does occur, for instance, the case in South Africa. Deployment of robots in the battle field turns war into a video game and may be very dangerous as the operator may never see the pain inflicted to others. It also disregards human rights as automated machines are deployed to fight human beings. Works Cited Arkin Ronald. Governing Lethal Behavior: Embedding Ethics in a Hybrid Deliberative/Reactive Robot Architecture. Technical Report GIT-GVU-07-11. Mobile Robot Laboratory College of Computing Georgia Institute of Technology. Brown S. Alan. “The Drone Warriors” Associate Editor, Mechanical Engineering, January 2010.pp.5-15 Coleman, K., “Android Arete: Toward a Virtue Ethic for Computational Agents”, Ethics and Information Technology, Vol. 3, pp. 247-265, 2001. Gonzalez, Pablo de Santos. Lazaros Nalpantidis and Aljandra Barrera. Latest Trends in Mobile Robotic Research. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems: Print ISSN 1729-8806. Online ISSN 1729-8814. DOI 10.5772/1.Vol 10, 2013, pp 2-35 Lin, Patrick, Bekey George and Abney Keith. Autonomous Military Robotics: Risk, Ethics, and Design: Ethics + Emerging Sciences Group at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Version 1.0.9, 2008, pp. 20-86 Singer W. Peter. Killing by Remote Control: The Ethics of an Unmanned Military. Ed. Published by Oxford University Press, USA. 2013. Pp.10-35 US Department of Defense (2007). Unmanned Systems Roadmap 2007-2032, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Retrieved on 19th May 2013 from http://www.acq.osd.mil/usd/Unmanned%20Systems%20Roadmap.2007-2032.pdf Read More