The Future of Warfare: Drone Swarms and Ethical Considerations

Several countries, notably the United States, are actively developing small, short-range drones that can operate in swarms. These drones would be packed with explosives and utilized as suicide drones to attack targets autonomously, utilizing artificial intelligence (AI) to work together.

Understanding Drone Swarms

Such drones are envisioned primarily as antipersonnel devices. In a war scenario, a single plane or missile could drop thousands of drones over a battlefield. These drones would autonomously seek out and attack all humans present, aiming to kill or maim those in the designated area. This concept can be compared to a neutron bomb without the radiation.

Cost-Effectiveness and Feasibility

While concerns about the use of such drones as an anti-personnel weapon exist, there is a valid argument that they could be effective. In the coming decades, humans will likely develop AI capable of identifying people on a battlefield. Additionally, although most civilian drones currently cost between $100 and $1,000, these costs are expected to continue decreasing. As such, drones could potentially provide a cost-effective anti-personnel option in the future.

Ethical Implications

Despite the potential cost-saving benefits, there are significant ethical considerations that must be addressed. The modern battlefield often includes urban environments with civilians present. This raises the question of how AI will distinguish between civilians and combatants.

The risks associated with such drones targeting innocent individuals in an urban environment are substantial. These drones could resemble the use of banned chemical weapons like sarin or VX, which pose a significant threat to civilian populations.

Legal and International Implications

As the U.S. places its faith in drone warfare, there is a high likelihood that these drones will be banned from the battlefield, similar to the prohibition of chemical weapons. While the development of these systems could provide a cost-effective and accurate anti-personnel capability, the risks to innocent civilians in an urban setting are too high.

Moreover, much like with poisonous gas in World War I and nuclear weapons during the Cold War, if the U.S. opts to develop these systems, other nations will be forced to follow suit to remain competitive. Eventually, the dangers of this kind of warfare will become clear, leading to a movement to ban these systems or impose stringent rules on their use.

Hopefully, this movement will succeed in completely banning these systems or at the very least in implementing strict rules to minimize civilian casualties before they are deployed in combat.