Mapping the Lethal Autonomous Weapons Debate: An Introduction

IF 1.3 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS
Josephine Jackson
{"title":"Mapping the Lethal Autonomous Weapons Debate: An Introduction","authors":"Josephine Jackson","doi":"10.1017/S0892679423000345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) can, on the one hand, be considered vital for the global governance process—in the sense of urging international cooperation on the ethical, developmental, and standards aspects of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS). On the other hand, the CCW may also embody a global trend that does not augur well for international solidarity, namely the lack of credible and comprehensive collaboration to advance global objectives of peace and security. In 2022, a majority of the 125 nations that belong to the CCW requested limits on a specific type of lethal autonomous weapons: “killer robots.” Yet, most of the major global powers—namely the United States, Russia, and China—opposed not only a ban on LAWS but also on any restrictions on the development of these weapons, not least because the United States, Russia, and China are actively developing this weapons technology. While there is currently much focus on the technological evolution of LAWS, less has been written about how ethical values can exert influence on a growing global consciousness around factors such as power, technology, human judgment, accountability, autonomy, dehumanization, and the use of force. This introduction lays the groundwork for dealing with these issues. It does so by showing that all these factors warrant a pluralist approach to the global governance of LAWS, based on multiple grounds, including the military, tech, law, and distinctive theoretical-ethical orientations; the rationale being to combine this expertise into a collection for publication. Reflecting the contributing authors’ firsthand experiences of the ethics surrounding the management of LAWS to address decisive and critical questions at an expert level, it provides a framing for the collection, showing that the use of international legal mechanisms like the CCW are crucial to considering both the potential and the limits of LAWS, as well as what it can contribute to areas such as international law, human rights, and national security.","PeriodicalId":11772,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & International Affairs","volume":"74 3","pages":"254 - 260"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & International Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679423000345","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) can, on the one hand, be considered vital for the global governance process—in the sense of urging international cooperation on the ethical, developmental, and standards aspects of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS). On the other hand, the CCW may also embody a global trend that does not augur well for international solidarity, namely the lack of credible and comprehensive collaboration to advance global objectives of peace and security. In 2022, a majority of the 125 nations that belong to the CCW requested limits on a specific type of lethal autonomous weapons: “killer robots.” Yet, most of the major global powers—namely the United States, Russia, and China—opposed not only a ban on LAWS but also on any restrictions on the development of these weapons, not least because the United States, Russia, and China are actively developing this weapons technology. While there is currently much focus on the technological evolution of LAWS, less has been written about how ethical values can exert influence on a growing global consciousness around factors such as power, technology, human judgment, accountability, autonomy, dehumanization, and the use of force. This introduction lays the groundwork for dealing with these issues. It does so by showing that all these factors warrant a pluralist approach to the global governance of LAWS, based on multiple grounds, including the military, tech, law, and distinctive theoretical-ethical orientations; the rationale being to combine this expertise into a collection for publication. Reflecting the contributing authors’ firsthand experiences of the ethics surrounding the management of LAWS to address decisive and critical questions at an expert level, it provides a framing for the collection, showing that the use of international legal mechanisms like the CCW are crucial to considering both the potential and the limits of LAWS, as well as what it can contribute to areas such as international law, human rights, and national security.
绘制致命自主武器辩论地图:导言
一方面,《联合国特定常规武器公约》(CCW)可以被认为对全球治理进程至关重要,因为它敦促在致命自主武器系统(LAWS)的伦理、发展和标准方面开展国际合作。另一方面,《常规武器公约》也可能反映出一种不利于国际团结的全球趋势,即在推进全球和平与安全目标方面缺乏可信和全面的合作。2022年,《常规武器公约》的125个成员国中的大多数要求限制一种特定类型的致命自主武器:“杀手机器人”。然而,大多数主要的全球大国——即美国、俄罗斯和中国——不仅反对禁止LAWS,而且反对任何对这些武器发展的限制,尤其是因为美国、俄罗斯和中国正在积极发展这种武器技术。虽然目前有很多人关注法律的技术演变,但关于道德价值观如何影响围绕权力、技术、人类判断、问责制、自治、非人性化和使用武力等因素不断增长的全球意识的文章却很少。本文的介绍为处理这些问题奠定了基础。它表明,所有这些因素都需要基于多种理由,包括军事、技术、法律和独特的理论伦理取向,对法律的全球治理采取多元化的方法;其基本原理是将这些专业知识合并成一个集以供出版。本书反映了投稿作者在法律管理伦理方面的第一手经验,在专家层面上解决决定性和关键问题,它为文集提供了一个框架,表明使用《常规武器公约》等国际法律机制对于考虑法律的潜力和局限性以及它对国际法、人权和国家安全等领域的贡献至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信