The Conservative and Libertarian Stance on AI and War Crimes: How the Use of Autonomous Weapons Systems Could Be Regulated to Prevent Violations of Human Rights and International Law

The Conservative and Libertarian Stance on AI and War Crimes

As technology continues to advance, the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into warfare has sparked a significant debate among political ideologies, particularly within Conservative and Libertarian circles. The use of Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS) raises paramount ethical and legal questions, especially concerning the potential for war crimes. Both conservatives and libertarians recognize the implications of using AI in armed conflicts but differ in their approach and proposed regulations.

The Conservative Perspective

Conservatives typically advocate for a robust national defense and view technological superiority as essential to maintaining security. But, their concern about AI in warfare centers on the implications for accountability in military actions.

• Human Oversight: Conservatives argue that autonomous weapons should always operate under human oversight. They fear that without a human element, decisions made by AWS could lead to unintended casualties and violations of international law.
• Accountability Mechanisms: There is a strong call for establishing clear accountability mechanisms to determine liability for war crimes involving autonomous systems. Conservatives favor the idea that a soldier or commanding officer should always be held responsible for the actions of any weapon system deployed.

For example, the 2019 U.S. National Defense Authorization Act included provisions that mandated human control over military operations involving AI, demonstrating an effort to balance technological advancement with ethical considerations.

The Libertarian Perspective

Libertarians emphasize personal freedom and limited government intervention. They typically approach the issues surrounding AWS from the angle of individual rights and non-aggression principles.

• Decentralization of Military Power: Libertarians advocate for a decentralized military approach, where private entities and contractors might handle defense matters, rather than a centralized government. They believe this could lead to more accountability in deploying AI systems.
• Regulatory Oversight: Unlike conservatives, libertarians may have reservations about heavy-handed regulations. promote a framework that limits government control while still insisting on necessary regulations to prevent human rights abuses.

A pertinent example is the Libertarian perspective on drone strikes, where they argue for greater transparency and oversight rather than an outright ban on the technology.

Potential Regulations on Autonomous Weapons Systems

Both conservatives and libertarians acknowledge the potential for AWS to violate human rights and international law, leading to a discussion about viable regulations.

Establishing Legal Frameworks

Creating a robust legal framework is essential for regulating the use of AWS. This framework should include:

• International Treaties: Nations could engage in bilateral and multilateral discussions to formulate international treaties that explicitly ban the use of AWS in certain situations, akin to the Chemical Weapons Convention.
• Internationally Recognized Standards: There is a call for the establishment of internationally recognized standards for the development and deployment of AWS to ensure compliance with human rights laws.

Promoting Research and Development

Encouraging responsible research and development methods that prioritize ethical considerations is critical. Companies and militaries should be incentivized to:

• Use Ethical Guidelines: Developing ethical guidelines for AI systems that prioritize avoiding harm to civilians and combatants alike.
• Conduct Impact Assessments: Before deploying new technologies, conducting comprehensive impact assessments can help predict and mitigate potential consequences.

Conclusion: Balancing Innovation with Responsibility

The debate over the use of autonomous weapons systems in warfare is multifaceted, with distinct points of view emerging from Conservative and Libertarian perspectives. While conservatives focus on the need for human oversight and accountability, libertarians emphasize individual rights and minimal government intervention. Both viewpoints converge on the necessity of implementing regulations to prevent violations of human rights and international law.

As technology continues to evolve, the challenge remains to promote responsible innovation in military applications. By prioritizing ethical standards and fostering open dialogue between stakeholders, a balanced approach can ensure that autonomy in warfare does not come at the expense of humanity.