Sections

Introduction

AI in Military Operations – International Perspective

AI in Military Operations – Indian Perspective

Conclusion

References

Introduction

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a field of intense interest and high expectations within the defence technology community. AI technologies hold great promise for facilitating military decisions, minimizing human causalities and enhancing the combat potential of forces, and in the process dramatically changing, if not revolutionizing, the design of military systems. This is especially true in a wartime environment, when data availability is high, decision periods are short, and decision effectiveness is an absolute necessity.

This two-part article focuses on development and fielding of LAWS against the backdrop of rapid advances in the field of AI, and its relevance to the Indian security scenario. The first part reviewed the status of AI technology, gave a broad overview of the possible military applications of this technology and brought out the main legal and ethical issues involved in the current ongoing debate on development of LAWS.

Here, in Part II of the write-up, international as well as Indian perspectives are given out on the current status and future prospects for development and deployment of LAWS. This part reviews the status of AI technology in India, assesses the current capability of the Indian Army (IA) to adapt to this technology, and suggest steps which need to be taken on priority to ensure that Indian defence forces keep pace with other advanced armies in the race to usher in a new AI-triggered Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA).

AI in Military Operations – International Perspective

LAWS – Current Status of Deployment

As of now, near-autonomous defensive systems have been deployed by several countries to intercept incoming attacks. Offensive weapon systems, in contrast, would be those which may be deployed anywhere and actively seek out targets. However, the difference between offensive and defensive weapons is not watertight. The most well-known autonomous defensive weaponry are missile defense systems, such as the Iron Dome of Israel and the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System used by the US Navy. Fire-and-forget systems, such as the Brimstone missile system of the United Kingdom and the Harpy Air Defense Suppression System of Israel, are also near-autonomous. South Korea uses the SGR-A1, a sentry robot with an automatic mode, in the Demilitarized Zone with North Korea. One example of an offensive autonomous system likely to be deployed in the near future is Norway’s Joint Strike Missile, which can hunt, recognize and detect a target ship or land-based object without human intervention [1].

US Navy Phalanx Close-in Weapon System

US DoD Perspective and the Third Offset Strategy

The US has put AI at the centre of its quest to maintain its military dominance. In November 2014, the then US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced a new Defense Innovation Initiative, also termed as the Third Offset Strategy. Secretary Hagel modelled his approach on the First Offset Strategy of the 1950s, in which the US countered the Soviet Union’s conventional numerical superiority through the build-up of America’s nuclear deterrent, and on the Second Offset Strategy of the 1970s, in which it shepherded the development of precision-guided munitions, stealth, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) systems to counter the numerical superiority and improving technical capability of Warsaw Pact forces. As a part of its Third-Offset Strategy, the Pentagon is reportedly dedicating $18 billion for its Future Years Defense Program. A substantial portion of this amount has been allocated for robotics, autonomous systems, human-machine collaboration, and cyber and electronic warfare [2,3].

Chinese Initiatives

China is also laying a huge focus to AI enabled autonomous systems. In August last year, the state-run China Daily newspaper reported that the country had embarked on the development of a cruise missile system with a “high level” of AI. The announcement was thought to be a response to the “semi-autonomous” Long Range Anti-Ship Missile expected to be deployed by the US in 2018. Chinese military leaders and strategists believe that the nature of warfare is fundamentally changing due to unmanned platforms. High-level support for R&D in robotics and unmanned systems has led to a myriad of institutes within China’s defense industry and universities conducting robotics research. China’s leaders have labelled AI research as a national priority, and there appears to be a lot of co-ordination between civilian and military research in this field [4].

AI in Military Ops – Indian Perspective

Perhaps as a result of being preoccupied with the huge challenges being faced on operational and logistic fronts including issues related to modernisation, the AI/ robotics/ LAWS paradigm is yet to become a key driving force in the doctrinal thinking and perspective planning of the IA. The above discussion dictates that this needs to change. The following paragraphs shed some light on the relevance of AI and LAWS in our context and what we need to do in order to keep pace with 21st Century warfare.

Employment Scenarios

The Indian military landscape is comprised of a wide variety of scenarios where autonomous systems (AS), and more specifically LAWS, can be deployed to advantage. With the progressive development of AI technologies, example scenarios in increasing degree of complexity can be visualised as under [5]:-

• Anti-IED Operations. Autonomous systems designed to disarm IEDs are already in use in some form, although there is scope for further improvement. Such autonomous systems are “non-lethal” and “defensive” in nature.
• Swarm of Surveillance Drones. An AI-enabled swarm of surveillance drones (as against manually piloted Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) or Unmanned Undersea Vehicles (USVs)) could greatly boost our surveillance capabilities. Such a system would be “non-lethal”, but could support both offensive and defensive operations.
• Robot Sentries. There is scope for deployment of Robot Sentries, duly tailored to our requirements, along the IB/LC, on the lines of SGR-A1. Such a deployment would be categorised as “lethal” and “defensive” in character.
• Autonomous Armed UAVs/ USVs. We are currently in the process of procuring manually piloted armed UAVs. Future armed UAVs/USVs with increasing degrees of autonomy in navigate/ search/ detect/ evaluation/ track/ engage/ kill functions may be visualised. Such systems would be classified as “lethal” and “offensive”.
• Land-Based Offensive Robot Soldiers. Offensive or ‘Killer Robots’ deployed in land-based conventional offensive operations would require a much higher technological sophistication to become a feasible proposition.
• Robot Soldiers in Counter-Insurgency (CI) Operations. If Robot Soldiers are to be successfully deployed in CI operations, a very high AI technology threshold would need to be breached. In addition to a more sophisticated “perceptual” ability to distinguish an adversary from amongst a friendly population, qualities such as “empathy” and “ethical values” similar to humans would need to be built into such systems. As per one school of thought, such capability can never be achieved, while others project reaching such a technological “singularity” within this century.

India’s Stand at the UN

India’s response in international fora has been to hedge against the future and, until such weapons are developed, attempt to retain the balance of conventional power that it currently enjoys in the sub-continent. At the Informal Meeting of Experts on LAWS held in Geneva in April 2016, India reiterated this strategy. Our permanent representative at the UN, Ambassador DB Venkatesh Varma stated that the UN CCW on LAWS “should be strengthened … in a manner that does not widen the technology gap amongst states”, while at the same time endorsing the need to adhere to IHL while developing and deploying LAWS [6].

India’s Overall Strategy

International deliberations on legal and ethical issues related to LAWS is unlikely to slow the pace of their development and deployment by various countries. China is already well on its way to becoming a technology leader in this field, and Pakistan is expected to leverage its strategic relationship with China to obtain these technologies. India, therefore, needs to take urgent steps to ensure that it remains well ahead in this race. It can do this by leveraging the strengths of players from both the public and private sectors. The challenge for the Indian political leadership is to put together a cooperative framework where civilian academia and industry can collaborate with bodies like the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) to develop autonomous systems. Also, steps should be taken to ensure that the United States becomes India’s strategic ally in autonomous technologies [6].

DRDO Project – “MUNTRA” UGV

R&D Initiatives by DRDO

The DRDO stated way back in 2013 that they are developing “robotic soldiers” and that these would be ready for deployment around 2023. Given DRDO’s credibility based on past performance, these statements must be taken as an expression of intent rather than as the final word on delivery timelines. DRDO’s main facility working in this area is the Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Robotics (CAIR), whose vision, mission and objectives all refer to development of intelligent systems/ AI/ Robotics technologies. CAIR has achieved some headway in making some prototype systems, such as “Muntra” UGV, “Daksh” remotely operated vehicle, wall climbing and flapping wing robots, etc. It is now in the process of developing a Multi Agent Robotics Framework (MARF) for catering to a myriad of military applications. However, in order to keep in step with progress in the international arena, these efforts alone may not suffice [1].

AI and Robotics – Perspective of the IA

The Indian Defence Forces, and the IA in particular, are still a long way off from adopting and operationalising even older generation technologies pertaining to Network Centric Warfare (NCW) and Information Operations (IO) in general and C4I2SR systems in particular [7]. As regards cutting edge next generation technologies such as AI and Robotics, presently there appears to be a void even in terms of concepts, doctrines and perspective plans. Occasional interactions with CAIR and other agencies do take place, mostly at the behest of the DRDO. Despite their good intentions, DRDO is not likely to be successful in developing lethal and non-lethal autonomous systems without the necessary pull from the IA which, as of now, is minimal. It is also worth noting that world-wide, R&D in these technologies is being driven by the private commercial sector rather than the defence industry. Unfortunately, Indian equivalents of Baidu, Amazon, Google and Microsoft, etc are yet to rise to the occasion, despite the strengths of our IT industry. Clearly, much more needs to be done.

IA – Need for a Lead Agency

Given the very high level of sophistication involved in AI/Robotics technologies, together with the fact that our public as well as private sector defence industry is not too mature, the IA’s project management interface with R&D agencies cannot afford to be based on purely operational domain knowledge. Therefore, while the Military Operations (MO) and Perspective Planning (PP) Directorates, in conjunction with HQ Army Training Command (ARTRAC), would necessarily be central to formulation of concepts and doctrines, it is imperative to institute, in addition, a lead agency which is well versed with operational requirements, and at the same time has a clear grasp of these sophisticated technologies. Currently, Military College of Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (MCEME) is the designated Centre of Excellence for Robotics. Since AI is a sub-discipline of Computer Science, Military College of Telecommunication Engineering (MCTE) appears to be best placed to play the role of a lead agency for the development of AI-based autonomous systems, provided the Corps of Signals develops AI as an area of super-specialisation. It would be prudent, at this juncture, to brainstorm this issue at the apex level and take urgent follow up action.

Conclusion

Given India’s extended borders with its adversaries on two fronts and the volatile CI scenarios in J&K and the North-East, it is well appreciated that having sufficient “boots on the ground” is an absolute must. At the same time, it is imperative that the IA keeps pace with the changing nature of warfare in the 21st Century, driven by rapid advances in technology on many fronts. AI/ Robotics technologies, after decades of false starts, today appear to be at an inflection point, and are rapidly being incorporated into a range of products and services in the commercial environment. It is only a matter of time before they manifest themselves in defence systems, in ways significant enough to usher in a new RMA. Notwithstanding the world-wide concern on development of LAWS from legal and ethical points of view, it is increasingly clear that, no matter what conventions are adopted by the UN, R&D by major players in this area is likely to proceed unhindered.

Given India’s own security landscape, adoption of AI based systems with increasing degrees of autonomy is various operational scenarios is expected to yield tremendous benefits in the coming years. Perhaps there is a need to adopt a radically different approach for facilitating the development of AI-based autonomous systems, utilising the best available expertise within and outside the country. As with any transformation, this is no easy task. Only a determined effort, with specialists on board and due impetus being given from the apex level, is likely to yield the desired results.

References

(1)   R Shashank Reddy, India and the Challenge of Autonomous Weapons, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Jun 2016, Accessed 13 Dec 2020.

(2)   Chuck Hagel, The Defence Information Initiative, Memorandum Secretary of Defence, 15 Nov 2014, Accessed 13 Dec 2020.

(3)   Franz-Stefan Gady, New US Defense Budget: $18 Billion for Third Offset Strategy, The Diplomat, 10 Feb 2016, Accessed 13 Dec 2020.

(4)   Jonathan Ray et al, China’s Industrial and Military Robotics Development, Centre for Intelligence Research and Analysis, October 2016, Accessed 13 Dec 2020.

(5)   George Perkovich, R S Panwar, Daniel Reisner & Mary Wareham, International Perspectives: Autonomy and Counter-Autonomy in Military Operations, Panel Discussion, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, 31 Oct 2016, Accessed 13 Dec 2020.

(6)   Bedavyasa Mohanty, Command and Ctrl: India’s Place in the Lethal Autonomous Weapons Regime, ORF Issue Brief, May 2016.

(7)   R S Panwar, Network Centric Warfare: Concepts and Challenges, The Army War College Journal, Winter 2015 [Restricted].