Suchergebnisse

Abstract
The integration of 'AI' technologies into weapon systems introduces a complex dimension to international relations and security, championing technological solutions for enduring warfare challenges, notably enhancing 'situational awareness' through advances such as automated 'vision'. However, the discourse, particularly in Western militaries like that of the United States, often overlooks inherent limitations and issues in AI-based warfare. This paper explores 'AI's' implications for military vision by inter alia scrutinising the US military's Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) process. It argues that the US military actively transforms the observation, decision, and action apparatus, progressively substituting human vision and decision-making, leading to a multidimensional de-visualisation. This denotes fundamental changes in human perception, reshaping knowledge, control, and agency dynamics. In conclusion, the paper suggests an imminent era of de-visualisation in the military – a deliberate relinquishment of human control for perceived military efficiency and effectiveness. This marks a transformative shift, urging nuanced consideration of the profound impact of 'AI' technologies on warfare dynamics.

The emergence of autonomous weapons systems (AWS) is increasingly in the academic and public focus. Research largely focuses on the legal and ethical implications of AWS as a new weapons category set to revolutionize the use of force. However, the debate on AWS neglects the question of what introducing these weapons systems could mean for how decisions are made. Pursuing this from a theoretical-conceptual perspective, the article critically analyzes what impact AWS can have on norms as standards of appropriate action. The article draws on the Foucauldian "apparatus of security" to develop a concept that accommodates the role of security technologies for the conceptualization of norms guiding the use of force. It discusses to what extent a technologically mediated construction of a normal reality emerges in the interplay of machinic and human agency and how this leads to the development of norms. The article argues that AWS provide a specific construction of reality in their operation and thereby define procedural norms that tend to replace the deliberative, normative-political decision on when, how, and why to use force. The article is a theoretical-conceptual contribution to the question of why AWS matter and why we should further consider the implications of new arrangements of human-machine interactions in IR.

Abstract
The emergence of autonomous weapons systems (AWS) is increasingly in the academic and public focus. Research largely focuses on the legal and ethical implications of AWS as a new weapons category set to revolutionize the use of force. However, the debate on AWS neglects the question of what introducing these weapons systems could mean for how decisions are made. Pursuing this from a theoretical-conceptual perspective, the article critically analyzes what impact AWS can have on norms as standards of appropriate action. The article draws on the Foucauldian "apparatus of security" to develop a concept that accommodates the role of security technologies for the conceptualization of norms guiding the use of force. It discusses to what extent a technologically mediated construction of a normal reality emerges in the interplay of machinic and human agency and how this leads to the development of norms. The article argues that AWS provide a specific construction of reality in their operation and thereby define procedural norms that tend to replace the deliberative, normative-political decision on when, how, and why to use force. The article is a theoretical-conceptual contribution to the question of why AWS matter and why we should further consider the implications of new arrangements of human-machine interactions in IR.

AbstractThis article considers the role of norms in the debate on autonomous weapons systems (AWS). It argues that the academic and political discussion is largely dominated by considerations of how AWS relate to norms institutionalised in international law. While this debate on AWS has produced insights on legal and ethical norms and sounded options of a possible regulation or ban, it neglects to investigate how complex human‐machine interactions in weapons systems can set standards of appropriate use of force, which are politically normatively relevant but take place outside of formal, deliberative law‐setting. While such procedural norms are already emerging in the practice of contemporary warfare, the increasing technological complexity of AI‐driven weapons will add to their political‐normative relevance. I argue that public deliberation about and political oversight and accountability of the use of force is at risk of being consumed and normalised by functional procedures and perceptions. This can have a profound impact on future of remote‐warfare and security policy.

Research on norms in International Relations (IR) includes various concepts related to how norms influence actions. These approaches focus on the decision-making process, and largely neglect the operationalization of norms. This omission leads to an analytical gap: a lack of attention to how the substance of abstract norms is transformed and constructed in the operationalization process. This article draws on the Foucauldian theme of governmentality to introduce a novel perspective on operationalizing norms. It focusses in particular on the role of techniques as understudied parts inherent to the reflexive processes of operationalization and meaning production. The article thereby contests the prevalence of fundamental norms in conventional IR theory. It demonstrates, instead, that global governance techniques do not simply translate rationalities into practice, but construct their very own normativities. These theoretical reflections are illustrated by analysing the operationalization of norms through indicators in the case of the European Union's human rights policy.

Research on norms in International Relations (IR) includes various concepts related to how norms influence actions. These approaches focus on the decision-making process, and largely neglect the operationalization of norms. This omission leads to an analytical gap: a lack of attention to how the substance of abstract norms is transformed and constructed in the operationalization process. This article draws on the Foucauldian theme of governmentality to introduce a novel perspective on operationalizing norms. It focuses in particular on the role of techniques as understudied parts inherent to the reflexive processes of operationalization and meaning production. The article thereby contests the prevalence of fundamental norms in conventional IR theory. It demonstrates, instead, that global governance techniques do not simply translate rationalities into practice, but construct their very own normativities. These theoretical reflections are illustrated by analysing the operationalization of norms through indicators in the case of the European Union's human rights policy.

The European Union (EU) is often characterized as ultimate normative international actor. Whereas the representations of the EU as alleged 'force for good' are well researched, there is a lack of investigations into the question on how the practice of a putative 'normative power Europe' is related to approaches of good governance. Despite the role of the latter notion in the EU's external relations and system of governance in general, we know little about the potentially diverse meaning of concepts of good governance on the global level. This article analyses the significance of good governance for international governmental organizations and the EU in a comparative perspective. It concludes that the EU is, in fact, promoting a unique approach of good governance that combines economic and political aspects. At the same time, the focus on functional-technical reforms risks to undermine the operationalization of the EU's political-normative power in the practice of external governing.

Autonomous weapons systems seem to be on the path to becoming accepted technologies of warfare. The weaponization of artificial intelligence raises questions about whether human beings will maintain control of the use of force. The notion of meaningful human control has become a focus of international debate on lethal autonomous weapons systems among members of the United Nations: many states have diverging ideas about various complex forms of human-machine interaction and the point at which human control stops being meaningful. In Autonomous Weapons Systems and International Norms Ingvild Bode and Hendrik Huelss present an innovative study of how testing, developing, and using weapons systems with autonomous features shapes ethical and legal norms, and how standards manifest and change in practice. Autonomous weapons systems are not a matter for the distant future - some autonomous features, such as in air defence systems, have been in use for decades. They have already incrementally changed use-of-force norms by setting emerging standards for what counts as meaningful human control. As UN discussions drag on with minimal progress, the trend towards autonomizing weapons systems continues. A thought-provoking and urgent book, Autonomous Weapons Systems and International Norms provides an in-depth analysis of the normative repercussions of weaponizing artificial intelligence.

Die zunehmende Bedeutung Künstlicher Intelligenz (KI) in vielen Bereichen der politisch-relevanten Entscheidungsfindung führt zu neuen Fragestellungen hinsichtlich der Rolle von Normen. Die bestehende Normenforschung hat in den letzten Jahren insbesondere zur Entstehung, Wirkung und Veränderung von Normen im öffentlich-diskursiven Raum wichtige, diversifizierte Konzepte angeboten. Die Perspektive auf operative Praktiken jenseits des öffentlichen Raums ist jedoch bislang kaum theoretisch erfasst worden. Im Kontext der Analyse militärischer Anwendungen von KI argumentiert der Forumsbeitrag, erstens, dass Praktiken der Entwicklung und des Gebrauchs von KI-Technologien, die von verschiedenen Akteuren jenseits des öffentlichen Raums durchgeführt werden, wichtige und gegenwärtig unter-theoretisierte Quellen von Normativität sind. Zweitens, möchten wir das Zusammenspiel von Normativität, also Vorstellungen von moralischen Pflichten und Gerechtigkeit, und von Normalität, d.h. Vorstellungen des Typischen und Durchschnittlichen, in der Entstehung und Entwicklung von Normen hervorheben. Die vorliegende theoretische Reflexion bietet der IB-Normenforschung einen breiteren analytischen Blick auf die Konstitution von normativem Raum.

The collection of eight articles in this special section provides insightful thinking points in the context of the political debate, the academic conversation, and the public interest in novel security technologies with autonomous features. These articles are also a call for further, empirically and theoretically informed research into the implications of AI for the international security dimension, specifically, and for societies more generally.

Autonomous weapons systems (AWS) are emerging as key technologies of future warfare. So far, academic debate concentrates on the legal-ethical implications of AWS but these do not capture how AWS may shape norms through defining diverging standards of appropriateness in practice. In discussing AWS, the article formulates two critiques on constructivist models of norm emergence: first, constructivist approaches privilege the deliberative over the practical emergence of norms; and second, they overemphasise fundamental norms rather than also accounting for procedural norms, which we introduce in this article. Elaborating on these critiques allows us to respond to a significant gap in research: we examine how standards of procedural appropriateness emerging in the development and usage of AWS often contradict fundamental norms and public legitimacy expectations. Normative content may therefore be shaped procedurally, challenging conventional understandings of how norms are constructed and considered as relevant in International Relations. In this, we outline the contours of a research programme on the relationship of norms and AWS, arguing that AWS can have fundamental normative consequences by setting novel standards of appropriate action in international security policy.