1 / 12

Ethics of Warfare: Understanding International Norms on Weapons

Explore the complexities of international norms governing weapons, from chemical warfare to autonomous killer robots. Discover why certain weapons are banned while others remain unrestricted, examining ethical considerations and global consensus. Delve into the role of agenda-setting organizations and the evolving landscape of humanitarian security networks. Analyze key cases like landmines and blinding lasers, and the challenges in regulating technologies such as depleted uranium weapons and autonomous killer robots. Join the discourse on framing public policies to navigate the ethical dilemmas of modern warfare.

grogers
Download Presentation

Ethics of Warfare: Understanding International Norms on Weapons

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Carpenter, International Organizations, 2011 International Norms oppose landmines and blinding laser weapons, but not weapons based on depleted uranium or autonomous killer robots. Why? April 1, 2019 POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  2. Why do we ban some weapons but not others? • Chemical warfare widely condemned… • Also: landmines, cluster mines, small arms proliferation • But: • Thermobaric weapons (fuel-air explosives, create huge fireballs to suffocate and burn people) • Psychotropic weapons: mood altering aerosols… • The puzzle: Ethical outrage about certain weapons but not others… POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  3. Agenda-vetting and gatekeeper organizations • Same theory as last time • Idea of the “norms entrepreneur” similar to last time as well • Cases analyzed are different: weapons POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  4. “International law” and the “law of war” • The Hague Conventions and the Geneva Convention generally restrict certain types of actions in warfare. • (These rules, of course, have limited power, but the point is that they reflect an international consensus that war should be conducted in certain ways, not others.) • So, what is barred, and what is allowed? POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  5. Table 1, salience of various weapons in the “human security network” • Top issues: Landmines, cluster munitions, small arms, disarmament (nuclear), chemical weapons. • Medium issues: nuclear, biological, nonlethal weapons, arms trade, remnants • Issues not on anyone’s agenda: Depleted uranium weapons, directed energy, blinding lasers, white phosphorous, autonomous weapons, psychotropic, thermobaric, explosive weapons, napalm… POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  6. Major players in the Human Rights Network • World Heath Organization • International Committee of the Red Cross • Human Security Network • Org. for Security and Cooperation in Europe • Human Rights Watch • International Crisis Group • Stockholm Peace Research Institute • Etc. POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  7. Figure 3, selecting 4 cases for study POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  8. Landmines • Used by the millions in virtually every war • Jody Williams, International Campaign to Ban Landmines, won Nobel Peace Prize • 1973 beginning of advocacy to limit them • 1991: activists seek to ban them completely • 1992 Human Rights Watch got on board • 1997, Princess Diana, Nelson Mandela, the Pope, Queen Noor… • 1997, 122 nations sign a Mine Ban Treaty POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  9. Blinding Lasers • US, UK, USSR militaries develop these weapons in the 1980s • Maybe “dazzle” or disorient the pilots of attacking planes, use in anti-aircraft defense missiles and surface to air guns…. • Or maybe just make lots of people go blind… • 1986 Sweden and Switzerland propose a ban at the UN • 1996, prohibition of lasers designed specifically to blind… POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  10. Depleted Uranium • Developed by the major powers in the 1960s, “armor piercing” weapons to penetrate tanks, bunkers, etc. • Gulf War, Kosovo (1990s), some concern about health effects • Campaign Against Depleted Uranium starts in the UK in 1999 • No action at all… POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  11. Autonomous Weapons • Different from drones, which have a controller in Tampa or Orlando or somewhere else actually driving the thing and shooting the weapons • These are robots with guns, and no human participation • Not the same as a booby-trap or a trip-wire • Use artificial intelligence to see a threat and respond with lethal force • All major governments have developed these… • No success in banning these POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

  12. How would you frame a ban on killer robots?How would the other side counter? POLI 421, Framing Public Policies

More Related