Keep killer autonomous drones off the battlefield, activists say - Action News
Home WebMail Friday, November 22, 2024, 09:16 PM | Calgary | -11.3°C | Regions Advertise Login | Our platform is in maintenance mode. Some URLs may not be available. |
Politics

Keep killer autonomous drones off the battlefield, activists say

Activists on Parliament Hill today are hoping to ensure deadly fighting machines that pick their own targets are never allowed to roam future battlefields.

Campaign to Stop Killer Robots wants Canada to be a leader in efforts to ban autonomous weapons

Peter Asaro, co-founder of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control, left, and Ian Kerr, Canada Research Chair for Ethics, Law and Technology, hold a news conference in Ottawa Tuesday to seek Canada's support for a ban on "killer robots" or battlefield drones. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

Canada is being urged to lead a new international effort to ban so-called "killer robots" the new generation of deadly high-tech equipment that can select and fire on targets without human help.

The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots is pushing for a new international treaty to ban such weapons from the battlefields of the future.

Paul Hannon, head of Mines Action Canada, said the development of such autonomous weapons primitive versions of the Terminator of Hollywood fame signals a profound change in the very nature of warfare.

Hannon's organization is one of nine international groups that are calling on Canada to take the lead in the banning of the weapons, as it was in the campaign against landmines in the 1990s.

"It was not that long ago that the world considered the landmine to be the perfect soldier. It is now banned because of the humanitarian harm it has created," Hannon said Tuesday on Parliament Hill.
An unmanned U.S. Predator drone flies over Kandahar Air Field, southern Afghanistan. Activists are worried that the next generation of drones will be able to target and kill without any human interaction at all. (Kirsty Wigglesworth/Associated Press)

"Canada led the movement to ban that weapon; it is one of the most successful international treaties of our era."

It would be far better to squelch the development of the weapons before they are actually built and deployed, Hannon said: once the weaponization genie is out of the bottle, it is much harder to get it back in, he noted.

Hannon also said his group isn't opposed to the use of robotics by the military for non-combat uses such as transportation.

The coalition has no evidence to indicate any Canadian companies are working on such weaponry, and the Department of National Defence has provided assurances it hasn't contracted any research on the subject.

"That doesn't mean there aren't, because there's not a lot of transparency on this," Hannon said.

Six countries are known to be working on the technology: the United States, Britain, Israel, China, Russia and South Korea.

Next generation of drones

Autonomous weapons don't actually exist yet, but with the rapid advancements being made in robotics, there are troubling signs, said Peter Asaro, co-founder and of the New York-based International Committee for Robot Arms Control.

He cited the 2010 "flash crash" on New York Stock Exchange that was ignited by a frenzy of computerized trading that drove down the stock prices of major companies.

At least two companies have created prototypes of unmanned combat aircraft that are deemed to be autonomous. Another company has a partially autonomous tracking and machine-gun system on the border between North and South Korea.

Mary Wareham, a Washington based arms expert with Human Rights Watch, said one of the aircraft makers, BAE Systems, sponsored a recent two-day symposium on the weapons in London.

"I think they realize that if they don't show interest and at least agree to a be a bit more transparent about the systems that are being developed, then that will increase suspicion, so it's in their interest to be transparent," Wareham said.

Ian Kerr, a law and ethics professor at the University of Ottawa, said removing humans from the decision to kill people poses a serious moral and philosophical problem.