Q1/2019 - Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (GGE LAWS)

4th Session of the GGE LAWS, Geneva, 25 - 29 March 2019

The GGE LAWS‘ 2019 work program comprises five core issues[1], including an investigation how to bring LAWS in line with international humanitarian law as defined in the Geneva Convention of 1948. At present there are no concrete plans for a codification in form of a moratorium or an international treaty.

Japan proposed in a working paper to initially concentrate on drafting a “political declaration”. On the one hand, they said, there was consensus about the guiding principles, the relevance of international law and the necessity of human control about LAWS. On the other hand, the parties involved were far away from having a uniform understanding of what “autonomous” and “lethal” weapons systems actually meant or an idea of the precise form of “human control” that should be exerted.

Russia explains in its working paper that there is no need to draft new instruments of international law for LAWS. In Russia’s opinion the existing international legal norms, including the Geneva Convention of 1948 and the relevant supplementary Protocols, suffice to cope with the challenges of LAWS[2].

The 4th session of the GGE LAWS ended on 29 March 2019. The discussion results will be presented in our report on the 2nd quarter of 2019.

    Expert Conference, Berlin, 15 March 2019

    At a high-calibre conference of experts titled “2019.Capturing Technology. Rethinking Arms Control”, which was held in Berlin on 15 March 2019 under the auspices of the Federal Foreign Office of Germany, legal, political and technical aspects of autonomous weapons systems were discussed.

    In a three-page declaration presented at the close of the conference, the foreign ministers of Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany requested that the development of new autonomous weapons systems must be fully integrated in the existing architecture of international disarmament agreements and arms control. According to this declaration, the new weapons systems give rise to questions such as the relevance of international law, the degree of human surveillance and control of the new, lethal autonomous weapons systems that is required, and to ethical considerations[3].

    Federal Foreign Minister Heiko Maas warned in his opening speech of a militarisation of cyber space: “The next war will no longer be waged with mega bombs alone, but also with megabits and megabytes. But what does this mean for transparency and for disarmament if the malicious object is nothing more than a code that can be copied and sent around the world in a flash? This constitutes nothing less than an attack on humanity itself, on human dignity, and on the heart of our constitution.” Maas called for internationally binding norms for autonomous weapons systems: “We need rules for autonomous weapons systems. Killer robots that lord over life and death on the basis of anonymous datasets and entirely beyond human control are already a frighteningly real prospect today[4].

    Mehr zum Thema
    Q1/2019GGE-LAWS
    1. [1] Group of Governmental Experts on Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems, Geneva, 25 - 29 March; “Focus of work of the Group of Governmental Experts in 2019: (a) An exploration of the potential challenges posed by emerging technologies in the area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems to International Humanitarian Law; (b) Characterization of the systems under consideration in order to promote a common understanding on concepts and characteristics relevant to the objectives and purposes of the Convention; (c) Further consideration of the human element in the use of lethal force; aspects of human-machine interaction in the development, deployment and use of emerging technologies in the area of lethal autonomous weapons systems; (d) Review of potential military applications of related technologies in the context of the Group’s work; (e) Possible options for addressing the humanitarian and international security challenges posed by emerging technologies in the area of lethal autonomous weapons systems in the context of the objectives and purposes of the Convention without prejudging policy outcomes and taking into account past, present and future proposals”, https://www.unog.ch/80256EDD006B8954/(httpAssets)/884DF349536F790BC12583C8004C3AEB/$file/CCW_GGE1_2019_1_Rev.1_Agenda_final.pdf
    2. [2] Potential opportunities and limitations of military uses of lethal autonomous weapons systems, Geneva, Working Paper submitted by the Russian Federation, Document CCW/GGE.1/2019/WP.1 dated 14 March 2019: “The Russian Federation is convinced that the issue of LAWS is extremely sensitive. While discussing it, the GGE should not ignore potential benefits of such systems in the context of ensuring States' national security. It is necessary to examine the modalities for applying the existing international legal restrictions and IHL rules to these systems. Thus, the concerns regarding LAWS can be addressed through faithful implementation of the existing international legal norms.” https://www.unog.ch/80256EDD006B8954/(httpAssets)/B7C992A51A9FC8BFC12583BB00637BB9/$file/CCW.GGE.1.2019.WP.1_R+E.pdf
    3. [3] Political Declaration: Conference “2019. Capturing Technology. Rethinking Arms Control”, Berlin, 15 March 2019: “While the rapid speed of technological development in the fields of artificial intelligence, life sciences and digital technology – to name just a few – is creating multifold opportunities for global progress, new technologies may also enable the development of new military applications and capabilities. It is of the utmost importance that the production, use and transfer of these types of weapons are firmly grounded in International Law and state-control. New types of warfare imply the need to adapt the future arms control and non-proliferation architecture. They also raise questions with regard to their conformity with international law and current ethical standards, as well as with the required level of human control. Against this background, we affirm the following: 1. We will work together to strengthen existing biological, chemical, conventional and nuclear arms control arrangements in a multilateral endeavour to maintain and reinforce the rules-based international order for a new technological age. 2. The time to act is now. Given the speed of technological developments, it is of utmost importance that we now analyse closely potential negative and positive effects of new technologies, and identify the need for further regulation and new arms control arrangements in order to maintain international peace and stability. 3. There is a need to build a shared understanding of how technologically enhanced military capabilities may change the character of warfare and how this will influence global security. 4. We need to intensify cooperation to prevent the uncontrolled proliferation of weapon systems, both existing and new. 5. The development and use of all weapons needs to be in full compliance with existing international law. 6. We need an intensified dialogue with and among the representatives of science, research and industry to encourage the development of ethical standards for the development of new technologies.” See: https://rethinkingarmscontrol.de/documents/
    4. [4] Speech by Federal Foreign Minister Heiko Maas at the Expert Conference: “2019. Capturing Technology. Rethinking Arms Control“, Berlin 15 March 2019: “The curse and blessing of technological development simply lie cheek by jowl. When talking here in Berlin today about new technologies and their impact on peace and security, then our focus cannot be on stifling or preventing technological development. This would be fatal for a country such as Germany as a high tech location and leading export nation. Essentially, however, the question is whether we are in control of technology or whether, ultimately, it controls us. … the hope that technological development will be able to contain wars is an illusion. …, many of these technologies penetrate political and legal grey areas in which the boundaries between right and wrong, between peace and conflict, become blurred. Moreover, new technologies are far more susceptible to proliferation, manipulation and misuse than conventional weapons. Hackers don’t need much more than a computer in order to carry out cyber attacks. And access to lethal pathogens, which can be misused as weapons, is much more difficult to control than a weapons or munitions depot. … our common systems of rules have almost always responded too late. They are not keeping pace with technological development and they therefore continue to be flawed. If new technologies are capable today of revolutionising the development of weapons and warfare, then we face a most fundamental question, namely will we manage to act with foresight this time around? Or will our rules kick in too late once again – perhaps this time finally too late? Doing nothing isn’t an option here. Our world of today has become far more complex and dangerous than was the case just a few short decades ago, even during the Cold War. The rivalry between the great powers is no longer the purview of just two blocs. New players have entered the scene, first and foremost China. New theatres of conflict have also opened up – from space to cyberspace. … we need rules for autonomous weapons systems. Killer robots that lord over life and death on the basis of anonymous datasets and entirely beyond human control are already a frighteningly real prospect today. This constitutes nothing less than an attack on humanity itself, on human dignity, and on the heart of our constitution. However, ethical considerations aren’t the only thing that speak against such weapons. Fully autonomous weapons are susceptible to manipulation and also to miscalculation. Automatic escalations – “flash wars” – and arms races are virtually inevitable. This is therefore a red line that we must not cross. We are committed to this in Geneva right now, and we want to make progress here this year. We want to enshrine the principle of effective human control over all lethal weapons systems at the international level, thereby taking a major step towards the global prohibition of fully autonomous weapons. … The next war – if I may dare to make such a bold prediction today – will no longer be waged with mega bombs alone, but also with megabits and megabytes. Even bombs are now controlled in this way. But what does this mean for transparency and for disarmament if the malicious object is nothing more than a code that can be copied and sent around the world in a flash? … 1. No country can seriously want our highly interconnected world trade system to fall victim to cyber attacks. 2. No country can allow hackers to paralyse its banking system or manipulate payment channels. 3. And no country can stand idly by and allow cyber attacks to endanger international aviation. Let us take these common interests as the starting point for articulating universal behavioural norms and standards in cyberspace. We already have the necessary processes for this, in the UN, for example, and also in the OSCE. What has been lacking so far is sincere political will. We must and we intend to change this. …“ See: www.auswaertiges-amt.de/en/newsroom/news/maas-conference-2019-capturing-technology-rethinking-arms-control/2199902