Work in the War: Why Future Wars can become even brutal

During the development of the atomic bomb, Robert Oppenheimer and his colleagues expressed concerns about the possible ignition of the Earth's atmosphere. Today, with the advent of autonomous weapons, we are at a similar risk to cause catastrophic damage, creating a weapon capable of killing without knowing fear. The consequences of such unrestrained weapons on the battlefield can be much more devastating than we can imagine.

In fact, humanity is unlikely to be aware of the restraining and mitigating effects of fear, fatigue and stress on the cruelty of hostilities. Focus translated the article by Antonio Salinas about how works can make wars even more scary. The spread of autonomous weapons will affect the war in the future. But we do not know exactly how. Although new technologies come out with operating instructions, they are not accompanied by a strategy, doctrine or tactics.

Throughout military history, the war was connected with people who killed under the cover of the original sense of danger and fear. People behave differently when they think they have a chance to die. The set of psychological stresses that arise during hostilities can contribute to misunderstandings that interfere with the lifetime of the most rudder "blue arrows" in combat plans. In view of this, it is important to find out how a person's arms will affect the future appearance of battle.

Military technologies are on the verge of revolution, which will change the appearance of war forever. Autonomous weapons, which are not acceptable to the psychological factors of hostilities, are no longer far off and will soon open a new era of lethal weapons. It will affect offensive and defense operations and provide new strategic opportunities. The deployment of autonomous weapons can make the war more efficient, but at the same time more cruel and more terrible.

Fear, fatigue, stress and indecision have long prevented engineers from developing military plans. But in the era of autonomous wars, machines will be unacceptable to these feelings. Many of us have seen or perhaps even painted beautiful blue arrows on a map of fighting that steadily moving to the goal. However, there is a striking difference between planning in the operational center and contact with the opponent.

Fighting plans can quickly come to naught for many reasons, but it all comes down to the fact that people are imperfect embodimenters for plans. Thanks to investment in rigid training, modern military has developed ways of adapting soldiers to combat stress and shock. However, no workouts can repeat the real dangers of war. Autonomous machines will not need training to produce courage under fire. Their courage will be programmed in their code.

Fatigue and stress, which have always influenced human armies, are unknown with autonomous weapons. The efficiency of the human unit can decline that it is in battle for longer and more requires rest. Even in distant wars, drones are prone to stress associated with endless observation of the purpose, as well as murder, which can affect them in various ways, including post -traumatic stress disorder. Autonomous "combat work" does not need time to rest far from the whirlwind of battles.

Their endurance will not be limited by the body that requires rest or therapy. Instead, their performance is determined only by the presence of fuel and wear and tear. Those who have personally encountered combat actions know that during the battle, people can solidify or run. Flying, or what is called a acute stress reaction in medicine, can disable the soldiers into different time intervals - from a few seconds and minutes to the whole fight.

Autonomous weapons that are immune to stress will not suffer from such psychological reactions that inhibit its work. Most likely, our future autonomous comrades will not hesitate and fade. Instead, autonomous warriors will continue to kill enemy combatants with the same ease with which the tracking camera photographs a car exceeding speed. Autonomous armies are able to permanently influence offensive and defense operations, as well as strategic variability.

The wider use of autonomous lethal weapons will undoubtedly open the Pandora box, offering commanders and politicians a tool, the consequences of which we can only try to predict, including its mortality. The Belter Harvard Center report for 2017 states that lethal autonomous weapons may be "as destructive as nuclear.

" Platforms that are immune to the arguments of reason, persuasion, pity or fear will eliminate psychological and physical restrictions, which have long prevented the implementation of the most ingenious plans. During the attack, people can froze, take a psychologically break or escape during offensive operations - long before the refusal of their physical possibilities. In turn, autonomous units leading the offensive will not stop, even having suffered enormous losses.

They will come until their program is stopped. The deadly autonomous weapon will consistently seek what the planners want: to provide the victory of "blue arrows". They will not be disturbed by the whistle of the balls or the loss of brothers. Autonomous weapons will not have to stop their attacks to organize medical evacuation. They will be able to sail, drive or fly past the burning corps of their brothers - and continue to bear death on an industrial scale.

The same factors should be taken into account during defense operations. Human units in history seemed or retreated long before their overall ability to resist. The human heart refuses before the combat efficiency of the unit. The power of autonomous platforms in defense can be even more deadly than machine guns and artillery during the First World War. In defensive operations, the battle for the last person has long become an anomaly, such as in the history of Fermopil or Alamo.

However, with the advent of autonomous platforms, the fight against the last car will be not the exception, but the norm. Another point that should be taken into account in this new era of wars: the elimination of fear and risk applies not only to combatants but also by politicians who consider strategic options. Politicians may be less cautious in using a military instrument when their people's lives are not at risk.

The spread of autonomous weapons can also give states more stability, supporting the will of the people to fight the lack of human casualties, especially during small wars. There will be no protests demanding to return "our cars" home. There are no international rules for autonomous systems. In the US Army, soldiers undergo careful preparation on the legal side of armed conflicts and know that they are not obliged to comply with illegal orders.

However, autonomous weapons will not obey orders or submit to a humanistic feeling. Machines will kill everything or whom they are programmed to destroy, and this makes them an attractive tool for potential supporters of war crimes, authoritarian regimes and genocide instigators. Authoritarian regimes will not have to worry that their troops do not dare to kill crowds of protesters. Instead, autonomous forces will suppress the uprising with cold efficiency.

Genocide instigators also do not have to rely on radically -minded troops or special forces for committing mass atrocities. Given the risks to international and humanitarian law, nation -states should seriously discuss the regulation and control over the spread of autonomous weapons at the international level. One of the key problems of regulating autonomous weapons is that technologies develop faster than we can control them.

Currently, autonomous weapons are not regulated by treaties in the field of international humanitarian law. The UN Secretary General Anthony Guterres has been in favor of the ban on lethal autonomous weapons systems and calls for a legally binding document to ban them. So far, US policy has not prohibited the development or use of autonomous weapons.

However, the United States is involved in the work of the International Discussion Group, known as a "Government Expert Group", which considers proposals for regulation of autonomous weapons. The Convention on specific types of conventional weapons may have some useful precedents, such as its provisions aimed at limiting non -selective damage from land mines.

But in the absence of any international agreements on control or regulation of autonomous weapons technology, there are no guarantees that could prevent the spread of this technology among nation-states and non-state entities. By limiting or completely eliminating the elements of fear, fatigue, stress and indecision, many of our attacks and defense systems will reach their bloody goals with cold efficiency and speed, unprecedented earlier on the battlefield.

One of the many things in the war we should beware of is when killing becomes too easy. After testing the atomic bomb, it turned out that it would not burn the atmosphere of the Earth. As a result, these fears were unfounded or at least false. Is such a fate of the dangers that I point here? Maybe. But only if we understand the main question and find real answers in the form of policy, regulation and technological control.

This is the main question is: are we ready for a new revolution in military affairs, which can open a new era by making the war even more efficient, more grotesque and terrifying? Antonio Salinas is an officer of the current army and graduate student of the Faculty of History of Georgetown University. After graduation, he will teach at the National Intelligence University. Salinas served for 25 years in the Marines and the US Army, where he commanded soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq.