Ethics of E merging Technologies EM and Non-Lethal Weapons

1. Ethics of Emerging TechnologiesEM and Non-Lethal Weapons University of Notre Dame Spring 2012

2. If it’s a non-lethal weapon, it has to be good and we should pursue it…right?Isn’t it obvious that not killing people is better than killing them? (Kaurin)

3. Plan • What does it mean? • Types of non-lethal weapons • Advantages • Issues

9. Why Consider Non Lethal Weapons Now? • Advances in technology, including dual-use • Alternative to lethal weapons needed for peacekeeping • Combatants and non combatants sometimes deliberately mixed • Increasing reluctance to accept war deaths • Law enforcement need for non-lethal arrest and restraint • Promise of being able to fight a bloodless and humane war • Presence of international media recording brutality of war • Increasing role of military in operations other than war, conflict in urban areas, peacekeeping • Need non-lethal methods for terrorist/hostage taking situations

10. Decline of Human Decisionmaking(EM, Cyber, Robots)(Adams) • More and more aspects of warfighting are not only leaving the realm of human senses, but also crossing outside the limits of human reaction times • Will create an environment too complex for humans to direct • Will never be a decision to remove human. Will gradually evolve toward systems whose logic demands that human control be more abstract with less and less participation • By 2025, speed-of-light engagement will be a common feature of military conflict • Human perception and coordination are simply not capable of intervening usefully. Defense then relies on automated responses… • Conflict will quickly escalate out of human control due to its speed and complexity

13. From National Academies Report

22. Four Core Principles of LOAC/IHL(Solis) • Distinction • Military Necessity • Unnecessary Suffering • Proportionality

23. General Rules on the Use of Weapons in Armed Conflict(Casey-Maslen, Geneva, 2010) • Rights of the parties to choose methods and means of warfare is not unlimited • Use of weapons which, by their nature, are indiscriminant is prohibited • Means and methods of warfare which cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering is prohibited • Must minimize incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects • Use of methods or weapons which cause widespread, long term and severe damage to the environment is prohibited • Prohibition on attacking persons who are hors de combat • States must assess new weapons to determine if any of the above are violated

24. Are Non Lethal Weapons More Ethical?(Kaurin) • Can be ethical, If and Only If (in order) • Provide military with more time and flexible response options • Reduce unnecessary suffering of non-combatants • Facilitate eventual restoration of peace • Minimize combat casualties (but, consider that a key test for JWT is: are you willing to suffer casualties in pursuit of your objective?)

25. NLW Should Not Be Used As… • A way to circumvent or make irrelevant the moral distinction between combatants and non-combatants • An easy technological fix to complex moral problems • A method to make war more palatable and easier to use as an option

26. NLW Should Be Used As… • A way to ameliorate the effects of war, never to make it easier to resort to it • Non lethal weapons would not and should not represent a new way of war; this is no revolution in war, at least not from a moral and legal perspective

27. NLW and Future Peace Enforcement Operations(NATO) • The existence of NLW should not be construed to lessen the requirements of discrimination • While intended to de-escalate, may actually lead to an increase in the resort to force, causing escalation • Not necessarily non lethal in their own right…may be used for illegal purposes • Danger of proliferation • Are not a substitute for lethal weapons, and their first use is not required • Further work is need to determine if existing LOAC and IHL are adequate

28. NLW – A Synopsis (Roland-Price) • It is wrong to talk a about MLW in isolation; they will always be used to complement lethal weapons • Availability of NLW does not imply that they must be used first, nor does it negate the right of soldiers to protect themselves with lethal force

29. Non Lethal Technologies – An Overview(Lewer and Davison) • Increased pressure for bloodless, humane war • Increased resistance to combat casualties • Use of Non-Lethal Weapons • Be able to discriminate and not cause unnecessary suffering • Effects should be temporary and reversible • Provide alternatives to, or raise the threshold for, the use of lethal force

30. Issues for the Joint Force Commander(Jeffery Voetberg, 2007) • Many NLW are intentionally non-discriminant – cannot determine individual effects • Will weaken existing constraints on the use of force • Likely will result in a non lethal weapons arms race • Easier to use for malign purposes – leave no tell tale marks of use • Lower the psychological barrier against violence

31. Concerns (Lucas)

32. Recommendations (Lucas)

33. The Meaning of Moscow (Fidler) • Moral principles underlying the rules of war have been remarkably consistent for centuries…should resist special treatment of NLW • NLW may expand rather than limit the just causes for using force

34. Other References • Fidler, Arthur, “The Meaning of Moscow: Non-Lethal Weapons and International Law in the Early 21st Century, International review of the Red Cross, Vol 87, Number 859, Sept 2005, pp • Lewer, Nick and Davison, Neil, “Non-Lethal Technologies – An Overview”, Science, Technology, and the CBW Regimes, Vol 1, 2005 • Adams, Thomas, “Future Warfare and the Decline of Human Decisionmaking”, Parameters, The Journal of the Army War College, Winter 2001-2002 • Mandel, Robert, “Non Lethal Weapons and Deterrence Dilemmas” • Bradford Non Lethal Weapons Research Project, Center for Conflict Resolution, University of Bradford, UK

35. Back-up Information