International Security Course–Fall  2020

Ethical Restraints

Brose hand waved away ethical concerns in his article, devoting one sentence to addressing it and seemed to suggest that technological advances won’t fail to be adopted because of ethics but a “failure of imagination.” Failure of imagination is not often the problem when it comes to technological advances; failure to predict implications or harms caused occurs far more frequently. What his article did illuminate, however, are some of the types of morally questionable technology that may come out of the fourth industrial revolution.

Miller, in contrast, offered a thorough analysis of autonomy and morality in his discussion of new technologies. In the United States and Europe, these concerns are being taken at least somewhat seriously. Miller mentioned how US companies have refused to provide technology to the Department of Defense. More recently, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and IBM have paused or eliminated contracts with law enforcement agencies following the massive protests of racial injustice and police brutality. In February, the District Court of The Hague ruled an algorithm-based program designed to identify and monitor people likely to commit benefits fraud was a violation of European treaty on human rights and privacy legislation. The Pasco County Sheriff’s Office in Florida is under scrutiny after the Tampa Bay Times published an investigative report on their “Intelligence Led Policing” initiative described by criminologists as “morally repugnant.”

The shift towards greater responsibility and the ethical use of technology is important, but as Scharre points out, treating AI as a new arms race increases incentives to launch untested technologies without thorough understanding of their risks and limits the opportunity for oversight. While there are some safeguards in liberal democracies such as civilian oversight of the military and freedom of speech and press that allows dissent and scrutiny of new programs, adversaries such as China are not similarly restrained. As liberal democracies adopt stronger privacy laws and protection for citizens, authoritarian regimes are free to test AI and other technology on their own citizens that can be deployed into the international arena. Scharre’s suggestion that the US try to work with Russia and China to develop safety protocols is a good one, but the lack of trust between these nations makes an arms race still likely. The US and its allies, assuming it still has any, should come together to hold each other accountable to shared principles of privacy and human rights and pool resources to help detect and counter adversaries’ attacks in this new frontier.

Unilateralists Trying Their Hand at Multilateralism

As we consider unilateralism and multilateralism this week, recent events have highlighted how even the staunchest anti-globalists seek to use multilateralism to achieve their goals. The Trump administration, at the urging of former National Security Advisor John Bolton pulled the United States out of a multilateral deal with Iran known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). In the reading for this week, Bolton decried any constraints on America’s military action or power as attempts by the global elites to control the American people. Bolton has long sought regime change in Tehran and believes diplomacy will fail to keep Iran from becoming a nuclear state.

The US withdrew from the agreement in 2018 and has sought to encourage other nations to follow its lead and push Iran back into isolation. The Trump administration has failed to convince any allies to join it in leaving the agreement, however. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has adopted Bolton’s policy of regime change and despite the imposition of sanctions and even a drone strike on a top general, the regime is in place and there are indications that uranium enrichment is increasing.[1]

Having failed to secure allies in their campaign against Iran, Pompeo went to the UN Security Council to try to push the UNSC to extend the UN arms embargo past its October expiration date. He was only able to convince the Dominican Republic to vote for the resolution. Now he has notified the Security Council the US will be triggering the snapback of sanctions as laid out in the original resolution. With the US no longer being a party to the agreement, other members of the Security Council reject that the US has any claim to initiate a snapback. Even the US’s closest allies, France and the UK, have indicated they will try to find a way to prevent the US from triggering the snapback and try to preserve the JCPOA. 

Short of outright war, Pompeo has found that unilateral action will not create his desired result and now must turn back to the much-maligned multilateral institutions and attempt to bully them into supporting US goals. The Trump administration’s general disdain for US allies, and Pompeo’s in particular, have made it almost impossible to now try for multilateral action against Iran, even though France and the UK agree that Iran is in violation of the terms. Isolated and humiliated, the United States is facing the consequences of its unilateralist policy and repudiation of alliances.