New arms treaty could ease 'robot' drone fears
Trefor Moss says unmanned planes shouldn't be deployed without a human controller involved
For a species that loves new technology - that lives and dies by it - it's strange how we sometimes demonise our own creations. Last time, it was genetically modified foods. They might just save the world, except that there's something "sciencey" and unnatural about them. Hard-to-understand foods? No, thank you.
Drones, or unmanned military systems, are GM's heirs. Everywhere we're encouraged to fear and detest these newfangled planes without pilots. We read about China and Japan embarking on a "drone arms race", or about the US developing a new "killer drone", or about autonomous "killer robots" that will snuff out human lives with all the moral uncertainty of a vending machine delivering cups of tea.
A lot of this is hysterical and alarmist. But there are also genuine concerns. Much like GM foods, drones lead us into a maze of legal and ethical questions that require serious debate - not facile conclusions one way or the other.
So first, the benefits. Most unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are harmless, unarmed systems for surveillance and reconnaissance. Many countries already operate them. They're cheaper than manned aircraft, they can stay in the air for longer, and no one dies when they crash. They're masters of the three Ds: "dull, dirty and dangerous" jobs that humans don't want to do, or can't do. They save money, time, effort and lives. Tick!
The controversy arises when you start strapping bombs onto them. Weaponised UAVs like the US' notorious Predators and Reapers have given drones a bad rep because of the way Washington has been using them to attack enemy targets, mainly in Pakistan.
This policy isn't as outrageous as it seems. It's an open secret that the Pakistani government has given the US permission to conduct its drone missions there - it's just that neither side openly admits it. This denial sends a garbled message to other countries acquiring an armed UAV capability that drones are somehow a weapon apart, exempt from the rules of war and sovereignty. They are not.
It's true that America's use of drone strikes has risen exponentially. An estimated 4,700 people have now died in these strikes but, like it or not, this is the way of the future.