GS Paper - III

The ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza are emerging as “AI labs” for warfare, there is also a diplomatic push to establish at least some general norms on how to limit the dangers of its military use.

India, which has been actively engaged with the issues of development and safe use of AI in the civilian domain, has stood apart from the emerging global debate on limiting the technology for military uses.

 What is the REAIM?

• The summit on Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain (REAIM) beginning in Seoul, South Korea, on 9 September 2024 is part of the new global diplomacy to shape global norms on the military applications of AI.
• The summit is being co-hosted by Kenya, the Netherlands, Singapore, and the United Kingdom.
• A wide range of governments, international organisations, technology companies, academia, and civil society from around the world are expected to participate.
• This is the second iteration of the summit; the first took place in February 2023 in The Hague, and was hosted by the government of Netherlands.
• Although there were no dramatic outcomes at The Hague summit, it broadened the global debate on the military dimensions of AI and brought a wider range of stakeholders into the debate.
• Until recently, the debate on military AI had been focused on autonomous weapons, the so-called ‘killer robots’.
• The fear that the conduct of warfare would be taken up by computers and algorithms had generated calls for controlling these weapons.
• Keeping humans in the decision-making loop on the use of force has been a major objective of this discourse.
• The issues relating to lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS) have been discussed within a group of governmental experts since 2019 at the United Nations in Geneva.
• Last December, the United Nations General Assembly took up for the first time the question of LAWS, and called on the Secretary General to gather the views of member states and report on the possible ways to address the ethical, legal, and operational challenges presented by autonomous weapons.
• The Secretary General’s report is expected to be presented at this year’s session of the UNGA beginning later this month.

From The Hague to Seoul

• The REAIM process widened the debate beyond ‘killer robots’ to a broader range of issues by recognising that AI systems are finding ever greater applications in warfare.
• While AI has long been used by leading militaries for inventory management and logistical planning, in the past few years, the use of AI in intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance of the battlefield has significantly expanded.
• Major militaries see the capacity of AI to transform the collection, synthesis, and analysis of vast amounts of data from the battlefield as useful in raising situational awareness, increasing the time available for decision-making on the use of force, enhancing precision in targeting, limiting civilian casualties, and increasing the tempo of warfare. Many critics have warned that these presumed attractions of AI in warfare might be illusory and dangerous.
• The proliferation of the so-called AI decision-making support systems (AI-DSS) and their implications are among the issues that are now being debated under the REAIM process.
• The Hague summit called for continuing dialogue, and the second summit hopes to codify a measure of consensus on these issues.
• The three-fold objective of the Korea summit is to understand the implications of military AI on global peace and security, implement new norms on using AI systems in military affairs, and develop ideas on long-term global governance of AI in the military domain.

Where the world, India, and China stand on AI use in weapons

• In a parallel effort to the REAIM summits, the US introduced a resolution on the responsible use of AI at the UNGA earlier this year, which was co-sponsored by 123 countries and adopted by consensus.
• While the UN effort is focused on broad objectives, the REAIM process is aimed at a more granular discussion of the issues and building a wide international coalition in developing a new set of global norms on military AI.
• More than 50 countries have endorsed the US political declaration on the responsible use of AI in the military domain.
• The US is reaching out to a wide range of countries in the Global South to inform them and win their support for the new AI initiative.
• On its part, Delhi has been in a ‘watch-and-wait’ mode in this unfolding debate. It is examining issues of substance and their long-term significance as it observes but holds back from full involvement with the new AI initiatives.
• India had not endorsed the “call to action” issued by The Hague summit, and it remains to be seen if it supports a blueprint for global AI action that is expected to be unveiled by the Korea summit. Delhi, however, can’t afford to remain a passive bystander in this profoundly consequential global debate on promoting norms for military use of AI.
• Beijing, in contrast, has been at the forefront of the strategic as well as regulatory discourse on the military uses of AI.
• Its military analysts talk about the role of AI in “intelligised warfare”. In 2021, China issued a White Paper outlining its approach to the regulation of military uses of AI. It also supported The Hague summit’s “call to action” on the responsible military use of AI.
• India’s bitter experience with nuclear arms control, where political indecisiveness and ideological hesitations cost the nation dearly, is a reminder that it is easier to shape the global normative architecture in the design phase than change it after the new rules are established.