Category: Uncategorized

If “war is politics by other means”, then Cyberwafare/AI is warfare by invisible means.  Without embarking into a long and unnecessary history lesson, I believe some context, (that wasn’t covered in the readings), is required.  

Technological advancements throughout human history can be tracked, and categorized, into digestible tidbits of information.  From pre-historic times, the Bronze Age (when bladed swords were introduced), to the Iron Era (arrows made their appearance here; think projectiles [today’s bullets], up through the Classical and Middle ages, warfare, aside from espionage, was a match of strategic wits and battlefield maneuvering.  Today, this is only partly true.  

Today’s battlefield goes far beyond munitions because technology, and how wars are fought, has fundamentally changed.  Example: during WWII, aircraft were radial-engine piston powered machines, which were not direct injected and required carburetors to push fuel through the engine.  This is no longer true.  Today’s aircraft, much like our land-based vehicles, are flying computers—they’re the most advanced most advanced computers imaginable, with the most sophisticated engines tucked away therein, with weapons mounted throughout.  The point being that a computer, regardless of its level of sophistication, is hackable whereas a piston based engine is not.  When once several battalions were dispatched to counter a threat, today’s enemy battalions can be fought by a unit size group of soldiers operating unmanned vehicles.  

Additionally, as referenced in basically every article, AI is “scaring” senior officials with regard to its implications.  This is dramatic nonsense; AI, for military purposes, is nothing new.  Our Apache helicopters have been utilizing a rudimentary, and subsequently modernized, version of AI to manipulate its sensors to point toward which every direction the pilot’s helmet is facing for decades.  AI was developed for military purposes, and only now we are seeing the hyper-aware modern version for civilian usage and that is scaring people—understandably.  The reality is that our defense agencies have been using AI, to a high degree of success, (think GWOT), for the past 20 years.  AI has been used to track the faces of tribal people, who often do not carry any form of written ID, by US forces in Afghanistan for decades.  

What we are seeing today is a completely new method of warfare; the sort that could not have been dreamt up by even the most creative of video game designers of the 1980’s.  For the first time in human history, we recently saw the full air-to-air dogfight between two unmanned aerial fighter vehicles (drones).  Additionally, for the first time ever, we saw the first ever human surrender of a solider surrendering to a drone that was dropping munitions.  

The battlefield landscape has fundamentally changed.  Where once Napoleon revolutionized the battlefield with his small unit tactics and self-sustained infantry, today’s battlefield is often being run by soldiers sitting in air-conditioned offices, with coffee machines and televisions running in the background.  The only people that are afraid of this are the rigid; those who are unable to flow, adapt, and change, according to the needs of today’s battlefield.  Those that are adaptable and innovative, as history has proven, don’t have much to fear with regard to AI and cyberwarfare—as it is just the next logical step in the art of war.  

New innovations in wartime technologies have always been a grave concern for the future of humanity. As time goes on, Humans will find new and inventive ways to wage war on each other while others find the time to criticize the ethical and moral implications of these new weapons and systems. This reminds me of the inventions at the dawn of World War 1, with the invention of airplanes, tanks, gas, and machineguns, all of which were subject to scrutiny at the time.

Now, there are new way to wage modern warfare. The one that I find most intimidating is the use of cyber-attacks that target a nation’s infrastructure or meddle in their political affairs. We saw the result of this type of intervention through the events of the 2016 election, where Russia used social media A.I. systems to influence the outcome of the election in their favor. Additionally, cyber-attacks could be used to shut down energy production in order to weaken a nation from the inside and cause panic. Such an attack would be devastating to the United States and leave us open for direct assault. Finally, the use of A.I. operated drones are cause for concern as well. Maria Cramer explains in her article that these drones were used in Libya by government forces to hunt down retreating rebel fighters. This raised concerns and criticisms by the global community because such technology could confuse enemy soldiers with civilian non-combatants. The combination of mercilessly harassing retreating soldiers and the possibility of A.I. targeting non-combatants by mistake make the use of A.I. drone systems a topic of great debate. However, use of A.I. systems in war could also be beneficial as we have seen in the war in Ukraine. These targeting systems have given the Ukrainians an advantage on the front lines and their success with these systems will prevent actors from underestimating them in the future.

Brose’s article, “The New Revolution in Military Affairs,” delves into the intrinsic components and challenges the military faces in today’s rapidly evolving landscape. In particular, it highlights the pressing problems in adaptation and the profound impact of modern technology on warfare. Brose’s work emphasizes the necessity of reevaluating our conceptualization and engagement in warfare in the modern age. 

One notable aspect of Brose’s analysis revolves around the disproportionate investment by the United States in “developing” outdated military platforms rather than prioritizing the development of innovation and new technology. This observation resonates with the military development we have witnessed in countries like China, where rapid advancements in military capabilities and utilization of cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence and anti-chip ballistic missile systems have taken center stage. This dynamic has sparked discussion about the use of semiconductors in these technologies and  U.S. concerns about China’s military capabilities advancement. 

Another compelling point Brose discusses in this article is the race for technological supremacy. The United States can no longer claim uncontested leadership on the battlefield as other powers have demonstrated their ability to outpace American capabilities in critical domains. In his article “How the Algorithm Tipped the Balance in Ukraine,” Ignatius points that in the Ukranie conflict, they have been avalible adapt and advance American technologies to gain an edge on the battlefield. Highlighting, that It is no longer solely about the effectiveness of traditional military strategies but rather how efficiently and rapidly we can adapt to technology in the field. 

Furthermore, Brose’s discussion emphasizes the need to redefine the concept of the modern battlefield. Traditional notions of warfare have given way to a more complex landscape characterized by technology, cyber threats, disinformation campaigns, and proxy conflicts. This complexity has created a complex evolving environment where a departure from conventional military doctrines is needed. Therefore,reconsidering approaches to the modern battlefield would entail remaining doctrines,tactics,and international alliances to navigate the shifting landscape effectively. 

As military technologies continue to reshape the international order, it is important to reevaluate how “prepared” we are to adapt and reevaluate our warfare methods. While the Ukranie conflict shed light on how this modern battlefield would look, it also has raised questions about the challenges facing military affairs.

This week’s article which particularly interested me was “Why artificial intelligence is now a primary concern for Henry Kissinger.” This 100 years old former US statesman warned us about the emergence of AI. He said If leading powers don’t find ways to limit AI’s reach, he said, “it is simply a mad race for some catastrophe.” In the 78th UNGA US current President stressed on finding ways to regulate AI. Already US has been a victim cyber attacks in the past few years.

Human beings have been surrounded by the “fear of unknown” since ages, governments, philosophers, great minds have tried to predict or build a pattern. With the data they have at hand they try to forecast and take actionable steps to prevent any adversaries. Now, AI impedes this capability of human intelligence. As Mr.Kissinger stated “”We are surrounded by many machines whose real thinking we may not know,” he continued. “How do you build restraints into machines? ”

The fear of AI boils down to the fear of loss of control, loss of privacy and loss of human value. While these fears are valid, it is crucial to remember that AI is a tool created by humans for humans. AI does not possess consciousness or emotions; it can only mimic cognitive processes based on its programming and data. Therefore, I believe establishing robust legal and ethical frameworks for data handling and algorithmic transparency is very important. Furthermore, forming an interdisciplinary dialogue between scientists, researchers and policymakers is crucial in navigating the societal impacts of AI and minimising risks.

In my opinion, a global governance system for AI is inevitable, not only policy based but also research based where governments can invest to invent techniques to counter cyber spam, warfare and other threats imposed by AI.

The article by The New York Times, “Killer Robots Aren’t Science Fiction.  A Push to Ban Them is Growing,” was particularly interesting to me because I am also seeing technology change law enforcement.  The article discusses a conference by the United Nations discussing the current and future concern for artificial intelligence weapons.  There were parties both for and against this technology, with the United States and Russia as the most notable countries being for.

First, this article is discussing weapons that use artificial intelligence to think on their own and discriminate targets on their own.  This is not the same as human controlled drones such as the predator where the decision to engage is on the person controlling it.  There was and is an argument that human controlled drones have a massive disconnect from valuable interpersonal connection that is involved in warfare.  This only increases when the decision to take a life is in the hand of articulation intelligence.  I agree with this idea.  In both the military and law enforcement there are times when you can legally engage a target, but due to judgement you don’t have to.  I believe this type of discretion would be removed with the use of artificial intelligence weapons when the weapon/machine has a controlled set of parameters in which it works off of.  I think emotion is a huge part of war that is necessary to create fear of another war.  I believe this will take that emotion out of warfare.

Second, a leading justification for this is to prevent the loss of innocent lives.  Just like in the civilian labor force, technology takes the places of workers.  With artificial intelligence weapons, less/no soldiers will have to risk their live in conflicts.  At first that sounds amazing.  I would argue this point as one of the major deterrents of war is that policy makers do not want to risk the lives of their country’s men and women.  With no lives at stake I fear policy makers will become more aggressive with the use of their armaments.  I think this will lead to more deaths but on the opposition instead of both sides.  

I do think that these weapons are innevitable, if not already here.  There is a reason why the United Stated and Russia opposed discussions of stopping research/production of artificial intelligent weapons.  Clearly they have the technology while others do not and want it as an advantage.  Could this be similar to the nuclear arms race with artificial intelligence?

The war between Russia and Ukraine confirms some predictions that have been made by the readings for this week’s class, which make the case that future wars will be waged using large quantities of cheaper, autonomous, or semiautonomous weapons. Small, inexpensive, and easily replaceable drones have been almost as relevant for both sides of the conflict than expensive state-of-art fighter jets and bombers (or perhaps even more so).

Russia, for instance, has been using small drones produced in Iran (a country that has been under severe sanctions for decades, its industries cut out from most of the world technological development) to attack deep into Ukrainian territory. Likewise, Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones, that cost a fraction of its American and Israeli counterparts (let alone the F-16s that Zelensky wants to receive), have been fundamental for Ukraine defense in the first months of hostilities and to recent incursions into Russian territory. The Bayraktar is capable of both remote and autonomous fight (more on the drone: <https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/05/16/the-turkish-drone-that-changed-the-nature-of-warfare>).

Developments such as these (together with AI processed intelligence) will probably make waging conventional war cheaper and will demand smaller armed forces. I do not believe, however, that it will necessarily make war more frequent. If on the one hand states might be tempted to attack given the lower cost of doing so, on the other hand they would be deterred by the knowledge that the other side (even if it is a smaller and less wealthy state) will also have the capacity of easily acquiring the means to put up an effective defense.

U.S. and Iran prisoner swap:

The U.S. – Iran deal, which secured the release of five Americans from Iranian custody in exchange for unfreezing five billion dollars in Iranian assets, represents a significant step in diplomacy. The release of the wrongfully detained Iranian Americans must be celebrated as a victory for human rights and diplomacy. However, evaluating the potential risks associated with such exchanges is important.

One of the primary concerns with such prisoner swaps is the possibility of incentivizing hostile states or groups to resort to kidnapping as a tool for advancing their agendas. If they see that abducting foreign nationals can lead to substantial gains, it may encourage more kidnappings in the future.

A crucial aspect of the U.S.- Iran deal is the allocation of the unfrozen funds. While U.S. officials have emphasized that the money will be transferred to a bank in Qatar and closely monitored to ensure it is used for humanitarian purposes, statements from the Iranian leadership raise questions about the transparency and accountability of these funds. President Raisi’s assertion that Iran will decide how and where to spend the funds adds an element of uncertainty.

Given Iran’s track record, concerns about the potential misuse of these funds are legitimate. Iran has been accused of providing military support to other countries, such as selling drones to Russia for use in the Ukraine conflict. Releasing these funds at a critical juncture raises the specter of them being diverted from their intended humanitarian purposes to bolster military capabilities.

China’s rise as a hegemonic power has been a thorn in the side of the United States for the past two decades. However, the prospect of China being a significant threat to our national security and world influence has only recently gained some traction over the past few years, especially since the Covid-19 pandemic of 2020. As China’s economy booms and their militarization increases, their view of the United States as a threat instead of a partner grows larger. President Xi Jinping has focused his efforts on lifting China above the United States in terms of being a global superpower by directly going against the desires of the United States and the world without negotiation. This is evident through some key issues regarding the two countries.

The first being China’s aggressive behavior against Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the South China Sea. The United States views Taiwan as a sovereign nation that has the right to self-determination, whereas China does not recognize Taiwan and desires to annex it. A similar situation has erupted with Hong Kong as citizens protest desperately to stay sovereign. Another issue that forces the two nations to quarrel is the war in Ukraine. China threating to support Russia in their invasion causes great concern for the United States and the rest of the world because this increases the possibility of China invading Taiwan like the Russians invaded Ukraine. Finally, and arguable the most important threat is China’s plan to surpass the United States by replacing the USD with the Chinese Yuan. This is the most pressing matter considering that Saudi Arabia is in active negotiations with China on selling them oil in Yuan, a move that would be devastating to the USD’s dominance on the global market. Not to mention that China’s business dealings in Africa and south America also undermine American influence in the region.

This leads to something I talked about in a previous blog post, the Thucydides Trap. The article written by Graham Allison tells us that the threat of war between the two states grows increasingly possible as time goes on. However, there may be a happy ending to this because the article states that war is most certainly not inevitable. Unfortunately, escaping the Thucydides Trap will not be easy and may require concessions and negotiations that neither president will want to make.

Do the benefits of AI outweigh the risks that come with them being involved in military affairs and tactics? No, they don’t according to many of this week’s readings and myself. AI can be used to replace soldiers and make it so less lives are lost when in war. This replacement of humans is actually beneficial, especially when countries are finding it hard to build their military. This would also be fiscally better, as it would be cheaper for one or two drones to do the job of an entire squadron.  This is in theory, as the current situation is for AI fighter jets to be used alongside as pilots. This could in the long term be a cheaper alternative, while also allowing for less lives to be taken and for there to be rapid military mobilization. 

     However, it’s not all positives. AI makes mistakes and unlike when soldiers or military personnel are punished or taken to the ICC, International Criminal Court, we can’t do this with artificial intelligence. How do we even hold AI responsible? Like when soldiers are gunned down by a drone without a human directing it to do this. Or what’s to stop an AI error that results in mass casualties? These errors are too damaging for AI being in charge of military tactics.  As argued at the Geneva Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, banning AI and these “killer robots” should be done as they lack any humanity. This is dangerous as they don’t understand what human life is worth and could easily cross into war crime territory. The other point argued is that the threshold for war could be lowered. (Satariano 2021) This would cause war to be more likely as it allows for a side to inflict harm without a human having to do it, therefore being less of a risk to their soldiers. AI being used in replacement of soldiers is very dangerous, with their likelihood of error and lack of repercussions. 

      Another downside to AI, is the way it can be manipulated to be repressive. “Authoritarian governments could use deepfakes to discredit dissidents, facial recognition to enable round-the-clock mass surveillance, and predictive analytics to identify potential troublemakers.” (Scharre 138) We can see AI being used as a tool for misinformation which would make the likelihood of war more likely, while also hiding atrocities and what authoritative governments are actually committing. This sort of technology is being sold by China, to other nations to surveil its citizens and monitor their every move. When AI can be used without any obstacles, it can quickly become used as a weapon not a tool. As I said before, the benefits of AI do not outweigh the risks that are involved, and can easily be used to inflict harm, whether on the battlefield or against a country’s own citizens. It’s a dangerous situation that we are steering towards with the US military in favor of autonomous weapons.