The Impact of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles on Our Society - Report Example

? The Impact of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles on Our Society By Introduction Even though the idea of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or also called ‘drone’, is an old one, the effective application of these UAVs has increased considerably since the 1990s (Hasik 2008, 9). Restricted to military activities beforehand, navigation of civilian airspace is being reflected on. Highly developed processes for merging different technologies into a system have enormous advantages, but also massive damaging impacts if mishandled or wrongly exploited (Valavanis, Oh, & Piegl 2009, 18). The possibilities of building systems that openly endanger societies all over the world are at least as huge as the possibility of applying this technology for constructive intentions or for the greater good. This essay presents an analysis of the positive and negative impacts of UAVs on societies and warfare. The Costs and Benefits of Unmanned Systems The design, construction, and use of UAVs will transform national security policy and society significantly. As more and more societies begin to use more automated processes, movement into areas affecting national security policy will certainly take place. The likelihood of building remotely operated, armed UAVs no longer sounds unbelievable. As expected, the development of UAVs would radically transform air battle. UAVs offer numerous advantages over manned structures, such as preventing human casualties, enabling flight control, and being more affordable or cost-effective (Bone & Bolkcom 2004, 10). UAVs enable a range of military and civilian operations not possible beforehand with manned systems and enable these operations to be carried out without risking the lives of the pilots, who operate at distant control centers. In counterinsurgency combat, the primary advantage of UAVs is an enhanced capacity to locate, deal with, and terminate enemies, while reducing civilian fatalities. Usually, UAVs would monitor a suspect and send the coordinates to a control station, where staffs would discuss with senior officials and look at maps in order to track civilian networks or buildings. After the discussion, the control station would dispatch directives to an airborne vehicle (Owen & Mueller 2007, 49). Moreover, as P.W. Singer observes, using UAVs give pilots the opportunity to engage in further risks with their vehicles, like hanging around longer and flying closer to the ground, hence resulting in a more precise attack. UAVs hence help commanding officers prevent civilian casualties during their attacks—an important factor in counterinsurgency combat (Callam 2010, 3). Unmanned aerial vehicles have further strengthened and sped up the evolving characteristic of warfare, and have been promoted for civilian uses such as search and rescue, wider security, and in observation of disaster-prone territories. Advancements in technology currently allow combatants to employ UAVs to deal with opponents from distant locations such as the Middle East. It also enables search and rescue attempts to be carried out in isolated locations or inaccessible ruins via the application of search and rescue automatons (Valavanis et al. 2009, 452). These automated machines have kept humans from entering dangerous situations. In a nutshell, the benefits of employing UAVs in comparison to using a manned system, are UAVs do not include, or require, a trained pilot aboard; lessen the exposure hazard to the pilot; can go into places that are hostile to humans; can remain airborne for more than 24 hours, conducting an accurate, constant monitoring of a territory (e.g. conducting thermal or visual scan of an area, conducting a geological scan, etc.); and can be designed to accomplish operations independently even without communication with its operator (Callam 2010, 2). But UAVs are not completely blemish-free. The use of UAVs has also received several criticisms. Several learned observers argue that the application of UAVs will promote more terrorist activities. Similar to other technological developments in the military, UAVs are viewed by civilians and enemies as wicked. As regards Israel’s campaigns in Lebanon, a local Lebanese civilian portrayed the idea of Israel’s exercise of UAVs as that “of an evil, brutal enemy that will use any means to accomplish its goals” (Callam 2010, 4). Strangely enough, assaults that are intended to terminate terrorists could in certain instances promote terrorist activities. In spite of the benefits of UAVs for counterinsurgency campaigns, this technology is not likely to transform the core characteristic of warfare as expected. Present UAVs are apparently very limited to perform operations by itself and can merely successfully function as an add-on to ground forces in sectors wherein air defense structures have been mostly removed. So long as humans perform the major warfare operations, there will always be political setbacks to taking part in warfare (Hasik 2008, 34). For instance, the drone system of the CIA is successful only in quite particular situations and is not likely to signify a permanent pattern in warfare. Not many territories across the globe are as isolated as northwestern Pakistan and the UAVs take advantage of the quite unique features of the territory. The hindrances to employing UAVs in hunter-killer campaigns such as risk of the fundamental air defense system, breaches of international law or legal implications, enhanced media exposure, make UAVs in other societies not viable (Callam 2010, 2-3). Employing UAVs without a manned system to really counteract the opponent will result in temporary benefits but is not a replacement for a continuing tactic. The impact that UAVs will have on the society will hinge mostly on technological capacities of the future UAVs. In the coming years, armed UAVs will keep on functioning as an add-on to manned vehicles, instead of a substitute. Even as the situations in northwestern Pakistan are distinctive, the issues concerning the CIA’s use of UAVs in Pakistan pose vital questions about how the use of UAVs should be administered someday (Owen & Mueller 2007, 49). As argued by Callam (2010), as the capacities of automated or computerized structures keep on advancing rapidly, policymakers must start resolving these issues immediately so as to stop the advancement of technology from going beyond the legal and moral principles underlying their function. If a functionally efficient UAV can be applied cost-effectively, numerous people suppose it may work as one of the major components of military revolution. In comparison to other military-driven structures, UAVs have the capacity to cut down overall ownership expenses considerably and possibly provide one way of relieving the imminent financial issues confronted by the services in changing their old facilities. Moreover, taking out human beings from a vehicle that keep the covertness and accuracy of manned stations may enlarge force-projection opportunities for military and political elites (Bone & Bolkcom 2004, 58). Such features are perfectly suitable for fighting the developing anti-access intimidation created by swiftly thriving, highly developed ground-to-ground and ground-to-air armed forces (Callam 2010, 3). Nevertheless, even though the technology has advanced, it is not free of any disadvantages or weaknesses. Unmanned air vehicles are significantly prone to crashes and malfunctions that have been blamed on human errors, inability to cope with the weather, and application of UAVs (Hasik 2008, 33-34). Likewise, ground systems have had their own limitations. Spatial confusion is an intrinsic and constantly revealed weakness in the application of ground systems. Absence of sufficient vehicle flexible orientation and poor dependability of search and rescue automatons continue to restrict their utility and effectiveness. In addition, the UAVs have more weaknesses and weak adaptability; furthermore, it does not have the ability to examine its environment (Valavanis et al. 2009, 28). Moreover, numerous highly developed UAVs are as costly as manned systems, and their costliness makes them non-disposable. As stated by Owen and Mueller (2007), their communications system, mechanization, and software intricacy make them functionally undependable for numerous operations. Up to now, communications technology has narrowed the success of the UAV system, particularly its armed counterpart (p. 61). The advantages of UAVs to society seem encouraging, but cost-effectiveness, operational value, and viability are still unidentified. A number of important system features, like flexible independence and safe, forceful, and networked flow of information are still domains of significant weakness and require immediate solution. Thus far, it is very difficult to accurately project risks and measure the costs related to operating a UAV system. Until these existing issues are resolved, any political and military action declared upon applying a functional UAV system would be inopportune. Conclusions The opportunities that unmanned aerial vehicles create for commercial uses and national security will furnish UAV systems popularity in the near future. The commercial and defense sectors are expected to witness an arrival of new actors from the industrial quarter, as developments in UAVs are expected to have vital commercial uses. Yet, UAVs can never be a replacement for the manned system, because the UAV system is simply an instrument that gets cues from its surrounding and obeys a preprogrammed set of directives. Even the very prominent artificial intelligence (AI) systems can merely enhance available technologies; they do not have the capacity to replace human beings due to the unpredictability and drastic transformations of societies and warfare. Although UAVs have enhanced the capacities of the military and political units, UAV systems will in no way supplant human beings on the combat zone. Specifically in warfare, unmanned systems can create a safe-free environment for combatants and reduce civilian fatalities; however, the human factor remains vital to the unmanned system’s effectiveness. Treating technological advancements as ‘flawless’ and ‘costless’ will simply result in needless clashes; thus, policymakers should continue carefully when using such technologies and create new rules for their function. Unmanned aerial vehicles have positive impacts on society and warfare, but this technology is still in the early stages of its development. References Bone, E & Bolkcom, C 2004, Unmanned aerial vehicles: background and issues, Novinka Books, New York. Callam, A 2010, “Drone Wars: Armed Unmanned Aerial Vehicles”, International Affairs Review, vol. 18, no. 3, p. 1+ Hasik, J 2008, Arms and Innovation: Entrepreneurship and Alliances in the Twenty-First Century Defense Industry, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Owen, RC & Mueller, KP 2007, Airlift Capabilities for Future U.S. Counterinsurgency Operations, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA. Valavanis, KP, Oh P, & Piegl, LA 2009, Unmanned Aircraft Systems: International Symposium on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Springer, New York. Read More