Balancing security, ethics and humanity as drones become cheap weapons of war

As demonstrated in Ukraine, drones and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) are changing the future of war and are constantly evolving in ways that are difficult to comprehend.

Whereas before, drones in warfare were the preserve of militaries, today, lethal drones can be used by anyone. States no longer have control over the monopoly of collective violence.

The implications for national and global security are profound. 

States have the responsibility to protect their citizens, territory, and institutions from external threats. This entails protecting one’s citizens from external aggression, one’s economy from cyberattacks that can disrupt essential services, as well as attacks that can damage critical infrastructure, energy sources, water and food security.

The proliferation and misuse of drones can affect national security in several ways. They can be equipped with various weapons, including explosives, chemical agents, or biological payloads, threatening the safety and security of citizens.

As seen in Ukraine, they can be used to target critical military and civilian infrastructure, such as energy supplies, transport, and telecommunications. Drones and UAVs hold distinct advantages for those using this technology.

As demonstrated in their use by the United States in Afghanistan, Somalia and Pakistan in their “war” against terrorism, they can execute precision strikes on targets.

Drones provide real-time surveillance and reconnaissance, thereby enhancing situational awareness that enables militaries to plan and execute operations effectively. They are more cost-effective to operate than manned aircraft and can reduce the need for or enhance the protection of “boots on the ground”.

While the risk of civilian casualties may be reduced by precision strikes, the killing of innocent civilians is inevitable. Besides the physical threat of being killed in a drone attack, the constant surveillance of drones has a profound impact on communities.

A study on “Living Under Drones” shows that communities suffer from widespread psychological trauma, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress.

Drone attacks also fracture communities as people become hesitant to attend gatherings or religious ceremonies or even send children to school. They experience a sense of helplessness and powerlessness to stop attacks, which have raised concerns about the human rights of those under constant surveillance from the “eye in the sky”.

This has fuelled resentment and anger, leading to increased recruitment and support for extremist groups. And the widespread availability of drone technology has raised concerns about their potential use by non-state actors and terrorists.

The development of small and commercially available drones has shifted the playing field, giving extremists something that they did not have before — air power. 

Drones are rapidly becoming a key part of insurgents’ arsenals in the Democratic Republic of Congo and al-Shabaab fighters in Somalia.

The use of drones by non-state armed groups poses an increasing threat to regional and international security, creating serious ethical and legal dilemmas.

And targeted killings using drones raise ethical concerns about the legality of such actions in terms of the principles of just war related to the jus ad bellum principle, which speaks to the right to attack, as well as the jus in bello criteria of proportionality and distinction, and prohibition of indiscriminate attacks.

The remote nature of drone operations heightens these, giving rise to what has been termed “bureaucratised killing” where algorithms and artificial intelligence (AI) inform decisions to strike. This abstraction can make it easier to justify the use of force without fully considering the potential risks.

Even greater ethical concerns surround the rapid development of autonomous weapons, where the human is potentially taken out of the kill chain or involvement is limited. Such systems can respond more quickly and aggressively than humans, leading to unintended escalation.

Worse still is when AI is linked to the swarming of drones, where multiple drones coordinate their actions to achieve a common goal. Coordinated armed drone swarms can execute precise strikes on multiple targets simultaneously, overwhelming traditional air defence systems, and making them very difficult to deter.

Presently this is leading to an arms race as countries seek to acquire and improve their capabilities, with the US, Russia, China, Israel, and the United Kingdom in front and many others following closely behind.

Experts argue that such weapons pose a fundamental threat to humanity and should not be developed or deployed.  These concerns have led to international calls for a ban on autonomous weapons systems that can select and engage targets without meaningful human intervention. 

Although the United Nations has been discussing the issue of autonomous weapons systems, with several countries expressing concerns about their potential dangers, the global powers have not supported their outright ban.

The UN Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems is working on developing regulatory frameworks to control their use.

Many global campaigns like the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots and countries are attempting to stop the development of this technology, given the potential impact on humanity.

However, two things are certain if one looks at the development in the armaments on display at the recent Africa Aerospace and Defence Expo in Pretoria: humans will always have reasons to fight and will always look for more efficient ways to kill each other. DM

Prof Lindy Heinecken is Vice-Dean for Research in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at Stellenbosch University.

This article is based, in part, on Prof Heinecken’s presentation at the 12th edition of the Africa Aerospace and Defence (AAD) Expo held in Pretoria from 18 - 22 September, 2024.