Abstract
Along the rapid development and proliferation of autonomous robotic weapons, machines begin to replace people on the battlefields. The use by the USA of Predators or Reapers and other unmanned aerial vehicles (so called drones) in Afghanistan, Pakistan and other places in the world clearly signals distancing of the soldiers from their targets. Some military and robotics experts have predicted that “killer robots” – fully autonomous weapons that could select and engage targets without human intervention – could be developed within 20 to 30 years. At present, military officials generally say that humans will retain some level of supervision over decisions to use lethal force, but their statements often leave open the possibility that robots could one day have the ability to make such choices on their own power. In this paper I will concentrate on the last kind of autonomous weapons, namely fully autonomous ones. It should however be noted that so far such a weapon does not yet exist. Nonetheless, lawyers should already be anticipating the effect of these technologies on international humanitarian law and the conduct of warfare. The thesis of the paper goes as follows: the use of autonomous weapons would be contrary to the basic and fundamental principles of international humanitarian law such as the principle of distinction, proportionality and military necessity and thus illegal. Such weapons are not capable of meeting the conditions enshrined in these principles. As such their use would threaten the well-being, life and health of civilians and civilian populations. On the other hand, there are scholars who are of the opinion that prohibiting the use of autonomous weapons would make no sense at all and that the development of such weapons is inevitable and will take place gradually. Moreover, autonomy in weapon systems might positively promote the aims of the laws of war in some technological configurations and operational circumstances – but not in others. As I will try to demonstrate below, the drawbacks of the use of autonomous weapons are of such magnitude that they exclude its legality. In my opinion, it is legal to use autonomous devices aimed at target identification but not autonomous weapons capable of attacking the target without human interference.
Highlights
Razem z gwałtownym rozwojem i proliferacją zautomatyzowanych, zrobotyzowanych broni maszyny zaczynają zajmować miejsce ludzi na polu czy też w kontekście walki zbrojnej
It is legal to use autonomous devices aimed at target identification but not autonomous weapons capable of attacking the target without human interference
Summary
Razem z gwałtownym rozwojem i proliferacją zautomatyzowanych, zrobotyzowanych broni maszyny zaczynają zajmować miejsce ludzi na polu czy też w kontekście walki zbrojnej. Że cel ataku nie ma charakteru wojskowego lub można oczekiwać, iż atak wywoła niezamierzone straty w życiu ludzkim wśród ludności cywilnej, ranienia osób cywilnych lub szkody w dobrach o charakterze cywilnym albo takie straty i szkody łącznie, których rozmiary byłyby nadmierne w stosunku do oczekiwanej konkretnej i bezpośredniej korzyści wojskowej, należy odstąpić od takiego ataku lub go przerwać W sprawie Galicia miał miejsce atak na cel wojskowy, więc osoby cywilne mogły stać się ofiarami jako collateral damage, jednakże przy tak zbliżonej liczbie zabitych i rannych wśród osób cywilnych i kombatantów wątpliwości w ocenie proporcjonalności powinny być rozstrzygnięte na korzyść wzmocnionej ochrony osób cywilnych, a tym samym na rzecz zasady humanitaryzmu. Broń w pełni autonomiczna byłaby niezdolna do przestrzegania zasad rozróżniania i proporcjonalności i jako tako zakazana przez międzynarodowe prawo humanitarne[42]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.