YAPAY ZEKANIN KULLANILDIĞI SİLAHLI ÇATIŞMALARDA ANLAMLI İNSAN KONTROLÜNÜN BİR ULUSLARARASI HUKUK NORMU OLARAK KABULÜ ÜZERİNE BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Year 2023, Volume: 81 Issue: 3, 49 - 101, 11.08.2023

Berkant Akkuş

https://doi.org/10.30915/abd.1143722

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Otonom silah sistemlerinin kullanımıyla ilgili önemli bir endişe alanı, insanların bir silah sistemi üzerindeki kontrolünün tamamını olmasa da bir kısmını bir bilgisayara vermesini içermesidir. Bu fikir, bir bilgisayarın silah sistemlerini otonom bir şekilde çalıştırma yeteneğinin, bu sistemlerin kontrolünü silahlı kuvvetlerin sınırlarının ötesine koyduğu endişeleriyle ilgilidir. Bu makale, anlamlı insan kontrolü kavramının süregelen söylemde oynadığı rolü incelemekte, anlamlı insan kontrolünün neleri gerektirdiğine dair mevcut perspektifleri açıklamakta ve bu makalede sunulan otonom silah sistemleri analizi bağlamında değerini gözden geçirmektedir. Bu makalede, daha geniş tartışmada olduğu gibi, anlamlı insan kontrolü terimi, belirli bir saldırının uluslararası insancıl hukuk kurallarına uygun olarak kabul edilmesi için gerekli olarak algılanan bir niteliği tanımlamak için kullanılmaktadır. Asgari düzeyde insan kontrolüne izin veren veya bunu gerektiren belirli bir silah sistemleri sınıfını ifade etmez; daha ziyade, uluslararası insancıl hukuk kurallarına yasal olarak uygun bir saldırıda kullanılan bir silahın esasen anlamlı bir insan kontrolü düzeyi içereceği sonucunu çıkarır.

Keywords

anlamlı insan kontrolü, yapay zeka, otonom silah sistemleri, uluslararası insancıl hukuk, martens kaydı

AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF MEANINGFUL HUMAN CONTROL AS A NORM OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN ARMED CONFLICTS USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Abstract

One major area of concern in relation to the use of autonomous weapon systems is that it involves humans giving some, if not all, control over a weapon system to a form of computer. This idea relates to the concerns that a computer’s ability to autonomously operate weapon systems puts the control of these systems beyond the bounds of the armed forces. This article examines the role that the concept of meaningful human control plays in the ongoing discourse, describes current perspectives of what meaningful human control entails, and reviews its value in the context of the analysis of AWS presented in this article. Within this article, as is the case in the wider debate, the term meaningful human control is used to describe a quality that is perceived to be essential for a given attack to be considered to be compliant with international humanitarian law rules. It does not denote a specific class of weapon systems that permit or require a minimum level of human control; rather, it infers that a weapon that is used in an attack that is legally compliant with international humanitarian law rules would essentially incorporate a meaningful level of human control.

Keywords

meaningful human control, artificial intelligence, autonomous weapon systems, international humanitarian law, martens clause

References

• Adams, Thomas. “Future Warfare and the Decline of Human Decision-making.” Parameters 31, no. 4 (2001): 57. https://doi:10.55540/0031-1723.2058.
• African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights. “General Comment No. 3 on the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: The Right to Life (Article 4).” Accessed 11 July 2022. http://www.achpr.org/instruments/general-comments-right-tolife/.
• Amoroso, Daniele, & Guglielmo Tamburrini. “Toward a Normative Model of Meaningful Human Control over Weapons Systems.” Ethics & International Affairs, 35, no. 2, (2021): 245-272. https://doi:10.1017/S0892679421000241.
• Amoroso, Daniele, Frank Sauer, Noel Sharkey, Lucy Suchman and Guglielmo Tamburrini. Autonomy in Weapon Systems The Military Application of Artificial Intelligence as a Litmus Test for Germany’s New Foreign and Security Policy. Berlin: Heinrich Böll Foundation, 2018.
• Asaro, Peter. “Jus Nascendi: Robotic Weapons and the Martens Clause.” in Robot Law, Editors Ryan Calo, Michael Froomkin, Ian Kerr, 367-386. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016.
• Asaro, Peter. “On Banning Autonomous Weapon Systems: Human Rights, Automation, and the Dehumanization of Lethal Decision-making.” International Review of the Red Cross 94, no. 1 (June, 2012): 687-709. https://10.1017/S1816383112000768.
• Bassiouni, Mahmoud. “A Functional Approach to General Principles of International Law.” Michigan Journal of International Law 11, no. 3 (1990): 768-818.
• Besson, Samantha. “General Principles of International Law: Whose Principles?.” in Les Principes en Droit Europeen – Principles in European Law, Editors Samantha Besson and Pascal Pichonnaz, 19-64. Zurich: Schulthess, 2011.
• Biddulph, Michelle and Dwight Newman. “A Contextualized Account of General Principles of International Law.” Pace International Law Review 26, no. 2 (March, 2014): 286-344.
• Birnbacher, Dieter. “Are Autonomous Weapon Systems a Threat to Human Dignity?.” in Autonomous Weapons Systems: Law, Ethics, Policy, Editors Nehal Bhuta, Susanne Beck, Robin Geiss, Hin-Yan Liu, Claus Kress, 105-121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
• Bode, Ingvild, Hendrik Huelss. “Autonomous Weapons Systems and Changing Norms in International Relations.” Review of International Studies 44, no. 3 (2018): 413. https://doi:10.1017/S0260210517000614.
• Bolton Matthew, Thomas Nash and Richard Moyes. Ban Autonomous Armed Robots. London: Article 36, March 2012.
• Bonafè, Beatrice, Paolo Palchetti. “Relying on General Principles in International Law.” in Research Handbook on the Theory and Practice of International Lawmaking, Editors Catherine Brölmann and Yannick Radi, 160-176. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016.
• Brehm, Maya. Defending the Boundary: Constraints and Requirements on the Use of Autonomous Weapon Systems Under International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law. Geneva: Geneva Academy of International Law and Human Rights, February 2017.
• Canellas, Marc, Rachel Haga. “Lost in Translation: Building a Common Language for Regulating Autonomous Weapons.” Technology and Society Magazine IEEE 35, no:3 (September, 2016): 50-58.
• Cassese, Antonio. “The Martens Clause: Half a Loaf or Simply Pie in the Sky?.” European Journal of International Law 11, no. 1 (February, 2000): 187-216. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/11.1.187.
• Chambre des Représentants de Belgique. “Proposition de resolution visant a interdire l’utilisation, par la Defense belge, de robot tueurs et de drones armes.” Accessed 07 June 2022. https://www.lachambre.be/kvvcr/showpage.cfm?section=/flwb&language=fr&cfm=/site/wwwcfm/flwb/flwbn.cfm?lang=F&legislat=54&dossierID=3203.
• Chengeta, Thompson. “Defining the Emerging Notion of Meaningful Human Control in Autonomous Weapon Systems.” New York Journal of International Law & Politics 49, no. 3 (2017): 833–90.
• Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons – Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. “The Report of the 2015 MoE.” Accessed 13 July 2022. https://www.un.org/disarmament/the-convention-on-certain-conventional-weapons/background-on-laws-in-the-ccw/.
• Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons – Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. “The August 2018 Report of the GGE.” Accessed 13 July 2022. https://meetings.unoda.org/section/ccw-gge-2022_documents_18542/.
• Cook, Adam. Taming Killer Robots: Giving Meaning to the Meaningful Human Control Standard for Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems. Alabama: Air University Press Curtis E. LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education, 2019.
• Crootof, Rebecca. “A Meaningful Floor for Meaningful Human Control.” Temple International and Comparative Law Journal 30, no. 1 (December, 2016): 62.
• Degan, Vladimir. Sources of International Law. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1997.
• Dworkin, Ronald. Taking Rights Seriously. London: Harvard University Press, 1978.
• Ekelhof, Merel. “Complications of a Common Language: Why it is so Hard to Talk about Autonomous Weapons.” Journal of Conflict and Security Law 22, no. 2, (Summer, 2017): 311–331. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krw029.
• Ekelhof, Merel. “Moving Beyond Semantics on Autonomous Weapons: Meaningful Human Control in Operation.” Global Policy 10, no. 3 (September, 2019): 344. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12665.
• European Parliament, Resolution of 12 September 2018 on Autonomous Weapon Systems (2018/2752(RSP)), P8_TA-PROV(2018)0341.
• Future of Life Institute. “An Open Letter to the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.” Accessed 14 July 2022. https://futureoflife.org/autonomous-weapons-open-letter-2017.
• Geiss, Robin. The International-Law Dimension of Autonomous Weapons Systems. Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, October 2015.
• Germany (Opening Statement, CCW Meeting of Experts on LAWS: General Exchange, May 2014).
• Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS) 9-13 April 2018 Statement By The African Group.
• Groves, Steven. A Manual Adapting the Law of Armed Conflict to Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. London: Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom The Heritage Foundation, April 2016.
• Haner, Justin, Denise Garcia. “The Artificial Intelligence Arms Race: Trends and World Leaders in Autonomous Weapons Development.” Global Policy 10, no. 3 (September, 2019): 331-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12713.
• Henckaerts, Jean Marie and Louise Doswald Beck. Customary International Humanitarian Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
• Heyns, Christof Heyns. “Autonomous Weapons in Armed Conflict and the Right to a Dignified Life: an African Perspective.” South African Journal on Human Rights 33, no. 1 (April, 2017): 46-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2017.1303903.
• Heyns, Christof. Report by the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions UN Doc A/HRC/23/47. Geneva: UN, April 2013.
• Horowitz, Michael and Paul Scharre. Meaningful Human Control in Weapon Systems: A Primer. Washington: Center for a New American Security, March 2015.
• Human Rights Watch. Heed the Call. A Moral and Legal Imperative to Ban Killer Robots. New York: International Human Rights Clinic, August 2018.
• Human Rights Watch. Losing Humanity: The Case Against Killer Robots. New York: Human Rights Watch, 2012.
• Human Rights Watch. Off Target: The Conduct of the War and Civilian Casualties in Iraq. New York: Human Rights Watch, December 2003.
• Human Rights Watch. Shaking the Foundations: The Human Rights Implications of Killer Robots. New York: Human Rights Watch, May 2014.
• ICJ, North Sea Continental Shelf (Federal Republic of Germany v. Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany vs. Netherlands (Judgment), ICJ Rep. 3, 44, 20/02/1969 § 77.
• International Court of Justice (ICJ), Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, 08/07/1996, § 226.
• Ipsos. “Three in Ten Americans Support Using Autonomous Weapons.” Accessed 7 July 2022. www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/three-ten-americans-support-using-autonomous-weapons.
• Japan (Opening Statement, CCW Meeting of Experts on LAWS: General Exchange, April 2018).
• Kolb, Robert. “Principles as Sources of International Law with Special Reference to Good Faith.” Netherlands International Law Review 53, no. 1 (April, 2006): 1-36. https://doi:10.1017/S0165070X06000015.
• Kolossa, Stephan. “Hasta la Vista, LAWS – Where Do We Stand on the Long-Debated Ban on Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems?.” Humanitäres Völkerrecht: Journal of International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict 1, no. 3 (September, 2018): 195-208.
• Marauhn, Thilo. “Meaningful Human Control – and the Politics of International Law.” in Dehumanization of Warfare, Editors Wolf Heintschel von Heinegg, Robert Frau and Tassilo Singer, 207-218. Berlin: Springer, 2018.
• Maritain, Jacques. Human Rights: Comments and Interpretation. New York: Columbia University Press, 1949.
• Mauri, Diego. “The Holy See’s Position on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems An Appraisal through the Lens of the Martens Clause.” Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies 11, no. 2 (June, 2020): 116-147. https://doi.org/10.1163/18781527-bja10001.
• Mazzeschi, Riccardo Pisillo and Alessandra Viviani. “General Principles of International Law: From Rules to Values?.” in Global Justice, Human Rights and the Modernization of International Law, Editors Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi and Pasquale De Sena, 125-160. Berlin: Springer, 2018.
• Meier, Michael. U.S. Delegation Statement on Appropriate Levels of Human Judgment. Geneva: US Mission to International Organizations in Geneva, April 2016.
• Meron, Theodor. “The Martens Clause, Principles of Humanity, and Dictates of Public Conscience.” American Journal of International Law 94, no. 1 (January, 2000): 78-89. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555232.
• Ministry of Defence. The UK Approach to Unmanned Aircraft Systems Joint Doctrine Note 2/11. London: Ministry of Defence, March 2011.
• Moyes, Richard. Key Elements of Meaningful Human Control. London: Article 36, April 2016.
• Moyes, Richard. Killer Robots: UK Government Policy on Fully Autonomous Weapons. London: Article 36, April 2013.
• Neslage, Kevin. “Does Meaningful Human Control Have Potential for the Regulation of Autonomous Weapon Systems?.” University of Miami National Security & Armed Conflict Law Review 6, (2015): 151.
• Norway (Opening Statement, CCW Meeting of Experts on LAWS: General Exchange, May 2014).
• O’Connell, Mary and Caleb Day. “Sources and the Legality and Validity of International Law - Natural Law as Source of Extra-Positive Norms.” in The Oxford Handbook on the Sources of International Law, Editors Samantha Besson and Jean D’Aspremont, 543-581. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
• Poland (Text, CCW Meeting of Experts on LAWS: Characteristics of LAWS, April 2015) 1.
• Republic of Korea (Opening Statement, CCW Meeting of Experts on LAWS: General Exchange, April 2015).
• Rosert, Elvira. How to Regulate Autonomous Weapons Steps to Codify Meaningful Humanitarian Control as a Principle of International Humanitarian Law. Frankfurt: Peace Research Institute Frankfurt Spotlight, December 2017.
• Sauer, Frank. ICRAC Statement on Technical Issues to the 2014 UN CCW Expert Meeting. Geneva: International Committee for Robot Arms Control, May 2014.
• Schmitt, Michael. “Autonomous Weapon Systems and International Humanitarian Law: A Reply to the Critics.” Harvard National Security Journal 4, no.1 (February, 2013): 1-37.
• Sharkey, Amanda. “Autonomous Weapons Systems, Killer Robots and Human Dignity.” Ethics and Information Technology 21, no. 2 (February, 2019): 75-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9494-0.
• Sio, Filippo Santoni de, Jeoen van den Hoven. “Meaningful Human Control over Autonomous Systems: A Philosophical Account.” Front Robot AI 5, no:15 (February, 2018):1-14.
• Sparrow, Robert. “Robots and Respect: Assessing the Case Against Autonomous Weapon Systems.” Ethics & International Affairs 30, no. 1 (March, 2016): 93-116. https://doi:10.1017/S0892679415000647.
• Ticehurst, Rupert. “The Martens Clause and the Laws of Armed Conflict.” International Review of the Red Cross 37, no. 3 (January, 1997): 125-134. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002086040008503X.
• Tomuschat, Christian. International Law Ensuring the Survival of Mankind on the Eve of a New Century: General Course on Public International Law. The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 2001.
• Trindade, Cancado. “Some Reflections on the Principle of Humanity in its Wide Dimension.” in Research Handbook on Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, Editors Robert Kolb and Gloria Gaggioli, 188-198. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2013.
• Trindade, Cancado. International Law for Humankind – Towards a New Jus Gentium. The Hague: Nijhoff, 2010.
• UNIDIR. The Weaponization of Increasingly Autonomous Technologies: Considering How Meaningful Human Control Might Move the Discussion Forward. Geneva: United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, 2014.
• Welsh, Sean. “Regulating Lethal and Harmful Autonomy: Drafting a Protocol VI of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.” Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society. Oxford, 27 January 2019.