Non-State Wawe in International Security: Civil Society and Autonomous Weapon Systems

Yıl 2024, , 97 - 132, 30.05.2024

Yeşim Bayram

https://doi.org/10.54838/bilgisosyal.1417715

Öz

Abstract
Purpose- Autonomous weapon systems, as new generation military technologies, are the subject of discussions in many areas such as security, law and ethics. The study aims to test whether non-governmental organ-izations are successful in mobilizing states to legal-ly regulate autonomous weapon systems. In this context, the working papers of the Government Experts Group meetings were examined and the steps taken regarding autonomous weapon systems were determined. In addition, the reports and stud-ies (research, surveys, etc.) of international non-governmental organizations were examined and the decisions taken at the state level were compared with the studies in question. Thus, an attempt was made to analyze the effectiveness of non-governmental organizations on the decisions of states.
Methods- Qualitative research method was used to analyze the relationships between events and phenomena in a holistic manner.
Results- Although globally organized struggle is the engine force in initiating interstate negotiations, efforts to establish legal regulations have fallen behind the pace of technological development in autonomous weapon systems. In this regard, it has been con-cluded that non-governmental organizations are ef-fective but insufficient in mobilizing states regard-ing autonomous weapon systems.
Autonomous weapon systems have been examined in the literature with a focus on international law and security. The study claims to fill the gap in the literature in terms of examining the contributions of civil society to the global debate.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Autonomous Weapon Systems, Civil Society, Non-Governmental Organizations

Uluslararası Güvenlikte Devlet Dışı Dalga: Sivil Toplum ve Otonom Silah Sistemleri

Öz

Özet
Amaç - Otonom silah sistemleri yeni nesil askeri teknolojiler olarak güvenlik, hukuk, etik gibi birçok alanda tartışmalara konu olmaktadır. Çalışma, otonom silah sistemlerinin yasal olarak düzenlenmesi hususunda sivil toplum kuruluşlarının devletleri harekete geçirmede başarılı olup olmadıklarını test etmeyi amaçla-maktadır. Bu bağlamda Hükümet Uzmanları Grubu toplantıları çalışma kağıtları incelenmiş, otonom silah sistemleri konusunda atılan adımlar belirlenmiştir. Yanı sıra uluslararası sivil toplum kuruluşlarının rapor ve (araştırma, anket vb.) çalışmaları incelenmiş, devletler düzeyinde alınan kararlar ile söz konusu çalışmalar karşılaştırılmıştır. Böylelikle sivil toplum kuruluşlarının devletlerin kararları üzerindeki etkinliği analiz edilmeye çalışılmıştır.
Yöntem - Olay ve olgular arasındaki ilişkilerin bütüncül bir şekilde analiz edilebilmesi için nitel araştırma yöntemi kullanılmıştır.
Sonuçlar- Küresel örgütlü mücadele devletlerarası müzakereleri başlatmada motor güç olsa da, yasal düzenlemelerin oluşturulması için yapılan çalışmalar otonom silah sistemlerindeki teknolojik gelişim hızının gerisinde kalmıştır. Bu bakımdan sivil toplum kuruluşlarının otonom silah sistemleri hususunda devletleri harekete geçirmede etkili fakat yetersiz oldukları sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.
Katkı/Farklılıklar - Otonom silah sistemleri literatürde daha çok uluslararası hukuk ve güvenlik odaklı incelenmiştir. Çalışma otonom silah sistemleri konusunda sivil toplum kuruluşlarının küresel tartışmaya katkılarını incelemek bakımından literatürdeki boşluğu doldurma iddiasındadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Otonom Silah Sistemleri, Sivil Toplum, Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları

Kaynakça

• Acheson R. (2023, Mart 14). “Taking on the War-Builders”, Reathing Critical Will,. 11:2, 14 Mart 2023.
• Achesoın R. (2023b). “Time to Leave the CCW Chatbox”, Reaching Critical Will, 11(3). African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
• (ACHPR) (2021). Res.473(EXT.OS/XXXI), 25 Şubat 2021.
• Akkuş, B. (2022). Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukukun İnsandışılaştırılması: Otonom Silah Sistemlerinin Uluslararası İnsancıl Hukuk Üzerine Potansiyel Etkisi Üzerine Bir Analiz, Güvenlik Çalışmaları Dergisi, 24(24)
• Amorosso, D. and Tamburrini, G. (2021). In Search of the “Human Element”: International Debates on Regulating Autonomous Weapons Systems, The International Spectator, 56 (1)
• Amnesty International (2021). Global: A Critical Opportunity to Ban KillerRobots, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2021/11/global-a-critical-opportunity-to-ban-killer-robots-while-we-still-can/ erişim:02.05.2023
• Article 36. (2016, Nisan). The United Kingdom and Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, Background Paper.
• Ataş, İ. (2022). “Otonom Silah Sistemlerinin İnsancıl Hukukun Temel İkelerine Uygunluğunun Sağlanmasında Anlamlı İnsan Kontrolünün Etkisi”, Hacettepe Law Review, 12 (1).
• Bahçecik, Şerif O. (2019). Civil Society Responds to the AWS: Growing Activist Networks and Shifting Frame, Global Po-licy.
• Bode, I. and Huelss, H. (2018). Autonomous Weapons Systems and Changing Norms in International Relations, Review of International Studies, 44 (3), British International Studies Association.
• Boot, M. (2006). War Made New, Weapons, Warriors, and the Making of the Modern World, Gotham Books.
• CCW, The Position Paper Submitted by the Chinese Delegation to
• CCW 5th Review Conference
• CCW (2017). CCW/GGE.1/2017/WP.4, 7 Kasım 2017.
• CCW (2022). CCW/MSP/2022/7, 2022.
• CCW, CCW/CONF.V/2.
• CCW (2018). CCW/GGE.1/2018/3, 23 Ekim 2018.
• Cicioğlu, F.(2019). “Türkiye’de Sivil Toplum”, (Ed.) Cicioğlu F., Ortadoğu’da Sivil Toplum- İmkânlar ve Kısıtlılıklar, 1.Baskı, Kadim Yayınları.
• Deeney, C. (2019). Six in Ten (61%) Respondents Across 26 Countries Oppose the Use of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems, IPSOS.
• Deeney, C. (2021). GlobalSurvey Highlights Continued Opposition to Fully Autonomous Weapons, IPSOS.
• Deo, A. (2017). Why Autonomous Weapons Should not be Banned?, Observer Research Foundation, 16 Aralık 2017. https://www.orfonline.org/research/why-autonomous-weapons-should-not-be-banned/ erişim: 01.05.2023
• Duygulu, Ş. (2019). Dönüşen Savaşların Değişen Araçları, Strateji Araştırmaları Serisi-10, SETA Kitapları, 1.Baskı, Temmuz, İstanbul.
• Erenel, F. (2019). Dijitalleşmenin Askerlik Mesleği Üzerine Etkileri ve Dijital Askerler, Yeni Dünya Güvenlik ve Ekonomi Mi-marisi, TASAM Yayınları.
• Ersoy, Ç. (2019). Robotlar, Yapay Zeka ve Hukuk, On İki Levha Yayıncılık.
• Eryavuz, F.B. (2023). Savaş Suçları Bağlamında Otonom Silahlar Hesapverebilirlik Sorunsalı, Anadolu Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 9:1.
• European Parlıament (2014). (2014/2567(RSP)), Resoulution on the Use of Armed Drones, 25 Şubat 2014.
• European Parliament (2018). (2018/2040(INI)), European Parliment Recommendation to the Council on the 73rd Ses-sion of the United Nations General Assembly.
• Fleming, N. (2009). Campaign Asks for International Treaty to Limit War Robots, New Scientist. Future of Life Institute (2016). Autonomous Weapons Open Letter: AI & Robotics Researchers, FLI, 9 Şubat 2016. https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/open-letter-autonomous-weapons-ai-robotics/ erişim: 06.05.2023
• Future of Life Institute (2017). An Open Letter to the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, CSE, http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~tw/ciair/open.pdf eri-şim:16.04.2022.
• Future of Life Institute (2018).Celebrating the Contributions of
• Stanislav Petrov, Future of Life Award 2018, FLI. https://futureoflife.org/fla-award/future-of-life-award-2018/ erişim: 15.05.2023
• Gardner, N. (2021). Clausewitzian Friction and Autonomous Wepon Systems, Comparetive Strategy, 40: 2021.
• Grugel, J. (ed) (1999). Contextualizing Democratization: The Changing Significance of Transnational Factors and Non-State Actors, Democratization: A Critical Introduction, Newyork, Routledge.
• Gubrud, M. (2014). Autonomy Without Mystery: Where Do you Draw The Line?, 9.05.2014, www.gubrud.net erişim: 22.09.2022.
• Guterres, A. (2018). Remarks at “Web Summit”, United Nations Speech.
• Heyns, C. (2016). Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions.
• HRW (2012). Losing Humanity: The Case Against Killer Robots.
• HRW (2014a). Shaking the Foundations: The Human Rights Implications of Killer Robots.
• ICRAC (2012). Statements, 26 Şubat 2012, https://www.icrac.net/statements/ erişim: 22.09.202.
• ICRAC (2019). Mission Statement, 2019. erişim: 04.06.2023.
• ICRAC. About ICRAC, https://www.icrac.net/about-icrac/. Erişim: 22.09.2022
• ICRC (2023, Mart 7). Autonomous Weapons Represent an Urgent Humanitarian Priority Today, https://www.icrc.org/en/document/icrc-autonomous-weapons-represent-urgent-humanitarian-priority-today-0 eri-şim:16.05.2023.
• ICRC (2015). International Humanitarian Law and the Challenges of Contemporary Armed Conflicts, 32nd International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Report, Cenevre.
• ICRC (2016).Views of the ICRC on Autonomous Weapon System, Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) Meeting of Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS), Cenevre.
• Johnson, J. (2020). Artificial Intelligence: A Threat to Strategic Stability, Strategic Studies Quertly, 14:1, Bahar: 2020.
• Kleinman, Z. (2023, Haziran 2). US Air Force Denies AI Drone Attacked Operator in Test, BBC, https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65789916 erişim: 16.07.2023.
• KRC. (2019a). Global Poll Shows 61% Oppose Killer Robots.
• KRC. (2019b). New European Poll Shows Public Favour Banning Killer Robots, 13 November 2019.
• Kurzweill, R. (2009, Mart 23). The Coming Merging of Mind and
• Machine, Scientific American, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/merging-of-mind-and-machine/ erişim: 06.07.2023.
• Lyel, D. ve Enrico C. (2017). Automation Bias and Verification Complexity: A Systematic Review, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 24 (2), ss.423–431.
• Marra, W.C. ve McNeill, K. (2013). Understanding “The Loop: Regulating The Next Generation of War Machines, Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 36 (3).
• Marks, P. (2008). Anti-Landmine Campaigners Turn Sights on War Robots, Landmine Action, New Scentist.
• Moyes, R. (2012, Mart 5). Ban Autonomous Armed Robots, Article 36, https://article36.org/updates/ban- autonomous-armed-robots/ erişim:04.04.2023.
• Moyes, R. (2012, Ekim 10).Autonomous Weapons The Risks of a Management by ‘Partition’, Article 36, 10 Ekim 2012.
• Moyes, R. (2021, Eylül 21). International Law and Safeguarding Human Control: Presentation to Vienna Conference on Autonomous Weapons, Article 36, 21 Eylül 2021.
• ORI (2015, Kasım 9). The Ethics and Governance of : Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems: An International Public Opinion Poll, ORI Vancouver Kanada.
• Özer, Adem (2022) Otonom Silah Sistemleri ve Uluslararası Hukuk, Ankara,Adalet Yayınevi.
• Özer, Adem (2022) “Modern Uluslararası Toplumun Bir Miti Olarak Martens Kaydı ve Otonom Silah Sistemleri”, Suç ve Ceza, 15 (4), 691-733.
• Pax Christi. (2011). Does Unmanned Make Unacceptable? Explaining the Debate on Using Drones and Robots in Warfare.
• Pax for Peace. (2020a). Deadly Decisions.
• Pax for Peace. (2020b).Slippery Slope: The Arms Industy and Increasingly Autonomous Weapons”
• PGA (2020). Global Parliamentary Declaration In Support of the Negotiation of a Treaty on the Prohibition of Fully Autonomous Weapons.
• Reuters (2021, 17 Aralık). U.N Talks Adjourn Without Deal to Regulate Killer Robots.
• Roff, Heather M. (2017, Şubat 8). What Do People Araound the World Think About Killer Robots?, Slate, 8 Şubat 2017.
• Roff, Heather M. (2014). The Strategic Robot Problem: Lethal Autonomous Weapons in War, Journal of Military Ethics, 13(3).
• Sauer, F. (2020). Stepping Back from the Brink: Why Multilateral Regulation of Autonomy in Weapon Systems is Difficult, Yet Imperative and Feasible, ICRC, 102 (913).
• Sauer, F.(2022). Autonomy in Weapons Systems and the Struggle for Regulation, Centre for International Governance In-novation
• Scharre, P., Horowitz, M. (2015). Meaningful Human Control in Weapon Systems: A Primer, CNAS, Ethical Autonomy Project Working Paper. Scharre, P. (2020). Çev. Kutsi Aybars Çetinalp,İnsansız Ordular: Katil Robotlar, Otonom Silahlar ve Makine Savaşları, Kronik Kitap Yayıncılık, 1.Baskı, İstanbul, Kasım 2020.
• Sharkey, N. (2007). Robot Wars Are a Reality, The Guardian.
• Sharkey, N. E. (2008).Cassandra or False Prophet of Doom: Al Robots and War, IEEE Intelligent Systems, 23 (4).Sharkey, Noel E. (2012). The Evitability ofAutonomous Warfare, International Review of the Red Cross, 94 (886).
• Stop Killer Robots. (2014). Nations Confront Killer Robots Challenge.
• Stop Killer Robots. (2017, Kasım 17). Support Builds for New International Law on Killer Robots.
• Stop Killer Robots (2020, Haziran 8). Campaign to Stop Killer Robots Wins the Ypres Peace Prize 2020. Stop Killer Robots (2018). All Action and Achievements https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/action-and- achievements/ erişim: 02.05.2023
• The Regional Conference (2019, 17-18 Nisan). Lethal Autonomous Weapons: a Preventive War, 1. Center for International Security and Policy.
• UN (1997). Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personel Mines and on Their Destruction, Oslo.
• UN (2010, Mayıs 28)). UN GA/HRC/14/24/Add.6.
• UNOG (2015). 2015 Meeting of Experts on Laws.
• UNA-UK (2020, Aralık 17). Welcomes call for UK to support a ban on Lethal Autnomous Weapons, United Kingdom Ministry of Defence (UKMoD) (2011). The UK Aproach to Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Joint Doctrine Note 2/11.
• United Kingdom Ministry of Defence (UKMoD) (2017). Joint Doctrine Publication 0-30.2 Unmanned Aircraft Systems.
• US Department of Defence (USDoD) (2012). Directive 3000.09.Autonomy in Weapon Systems, 21 Kasım 2012.
• US Department of Defence (USDoD). Roadmap FY2011-2036.
• Wareham, M. (2017). Banning Killer Robots in 2017, The Cipher Brief .https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/01/15/banning-killer-robots-2017 erişim: 01.04.2023.
• Watson, B. (2017). The Drones of ISIS, Defense One, 12 Ocak 2017.
• Yavuz, C. (2015).“Kamuoyu Oluşumunda Stratejik Bir Araç Olarak Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları”, Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(2).