 |
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Mark Gubrud, 20 September 2013,
In November 2012, United States Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter signed directive 3000.09, establishing policy for the “design, development, acquisition, testing, fielding, and … application of lethal or non-lethal, kinetic or non-kinetic, force by autonomous or semi-autonomous weapon systems.” Without fanfare, the world had its first openly declared national policy for killer robots.
The policy has been widely misperceived as one of caution. According to one account, the directive promises that a human will always decide when a robot kills another human. Others even read it as imposing a 10-year moratorium to allow for discussion of ethics and safeguards. However, as a Defense Department spokesman confirmed for me, the 10-year expiration date is routine for such directives, and the policy itself is “not a moratorium on anything.”
A careful reading of the directive finds that it lists some broad and imprecise criteria and requires senior officials to certify that these criteria have been met if systems are intended to target and kill people by machine decision alone. But it fully supports developing, testing, and using the technology, without delay. Far from applying the brakes, the policy in effect overrides longstanding resistance within the military, establishes a framework for managing legal, ethical, and technical concerns, and signals to developers and vendors that the Pentagon is serious about autonomous weapons....
After the drones this is the logical next step. Nothing New actually the Berlin Wall was partly guarded with "killer robots" and the Russians had a "doomsday" machine during the cold war, which would send automatically the USA a retaliation strike after an all out strike on the USSR. I still see the headlines of the news papers of those days before my eyes. We in the Netherlands were scared to death by those and other cold war news, because we very well understood that Europe would be the major battle field during the cold war, because all those forwarded deployment of US forces and Nuclear Weapons on our soil.
But any way it would be unethical, immoral, and maybe even illegal and criminal, if they would be used the same way those drones are now used !
One thing I am getting more and more convinced of is that Robots will survive Humans on this Planet !
Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use
US killer robot policy: Full speed ahead
Related:
Will those old F16, retrofitted, not only become drones, but Kamikaze airplanes, the first without a dead pilot ?
It seem that WAR,WAR,WAR is the only thing those boys with toys seem to be able to think off !
More weapons, more killings, more victims - The idea only already makes me sick !
Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use
Picture source: BBC - http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/70106000/png/_70106349_tes2.png
Empty F-16 jet tested by Boeing and US Air Force
By Leo Kelion Technology reporter, BBC News Technology, 24 September 2013,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24231077
A video of the test has been posted online. You can find it at the page:
Boeing -- On Target: F-16 flies with an empty cockpit,
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/Features/2013/09/bds_qf16_09_23_13.page
Drone strikes and International Law:
An Interesting article on the subject appeared in The Guardian (UK):
UN rapporteur Christof Heyns condemns use of drone strikes
Law professor's study says strikes for 'policing' harm global security and spur proliferation among states and terrorists
Owen Bowcott, Legal affairs correspondent theguardian.com, Thursday 17 October 2013, at:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/17/un-rapporteur-heyns-drone-strikes-yemen-pakistan
But...
For those of us that are interested in the actual report about drones by UN Special rapporteur Extrajudicial Christof Heyns, below is a link to the original report:
Summary
In the present report, the Special Rapporteur focuses on the use of lethal force through armed drones from the perspective of protection of the right to life.
Although drones are not illegal weapons, they can make it easier for States to deploy deadly and targeted force on the territories of other States. As such, they risk undermining the protection of life in the immediate and longer terms. If the right to life is to be secured, it is imperative that the limitations posed by international law on the use of force are not weakened by broad justifications of drone strikes.
The Special Rapporteur examines the ways in which the constitutive regimes of international law, including international human rights law, international humanitarian law and the law on the inter-State use of force, regulate the use of armed drones. He reiterates that these legal regimes constitute an interconnected and holistic system and emphasizes the distinctive role of each in protecting the right to life. He cautions against wide and permissive interpretations of their rules and standards and underlines the centrality of transparency and accountability obligations.
the report can be found at:
http://justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/UN-Special-Rapporteur-Extrajudicial-Christof-Heyns-Report-Drones.pdf
| |
No comments:
Post a Comment