Autonomous Weapons – the “Kalashnikovs” of Tomorrow? An Analysis of the Meetings of Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems within the framework of the United Nations' Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons

Abstract

After the invention of gunpowder and the development of nuclear weapons, the world faces a third revolution in warfare: lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS). Since 2014, states, scientists and civil society activist have been discussing the risks of such systems and possibilities to regulate them within the framework of the United Nations’ Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). After three years of meetings, in which there has been a lot of talk but little progress, the debate is in danger of getting into a gridlock and neglecting potential consequences of autonomous weapons systems. This thesis explores how a more comprehensive understanding of the legal and ethical challenges that autonomous weapons systems pose can be obtained. The main findings illustrate that the debate focuses around efforts to define autonomy and to enclose LAWS within established regulatory systems, particularly international humanitarian law (IHL) and human rights based principles. The study further shows that the concept of meaningful human control has emerged as the main imperative in the debate, reflecting a dominant instrumentalism in arms control practices. Moreover, the debate is dominated by a binary view of the relation between technology and society which results in different perceptions of the implications of LAWS. This study thus argues that only wide-ranging debate about the relationship of autonomous weapons systems to the nature and purpose of military violence can adequately address the risks of mechanised, dehumanised violence, lethal or non-lethal, and find adequate ways of regulating it.