The rivalry between U.S. and China over drone technologies is entering an important phase with artificial intelligence. The works focus on the squadrons of air and sea drones, like a swarm of bees, to overwhelm an enemy.
The report was written by Frank Bajak and Zen Soo on military.com.
Comment on the report by Mustafa Kirisci:
The article effectively highlights the urgent need for international cooperation and arms control measures to mitigate the security implications of military drone swarm technology. More importantly, it emphasizes how AI-enabled weapons can exacerbate the existing tension between two great powers, which has serious implications for international security. It rightly underscores the challenges posed by the unchecked proliferation of autonomous weapons systems to rogue nations and non-state actors, thereby emphasizing the importance of regulatory frameworks and diplomatic initiatives to promote responsible use. By framing the U.S.-China competition on military drone swarm technology as a potential catalyst for a global arms race, the article provides a reflection on the broader implications of emerging technologies for international security and stability.
Besides these well-discussed arguments, the article needs to expand the discussion over certain arguments and suggestions it makes. For instance, while the article effectively underscores the security implications of this technological race, it tends to focus more on speculative scenarios rather than concrete evidence of imminent threats. The portrayal of drone swarms as a revolutionary warfare tactic capable of overwhelming adversaries lacks nuanced analysis of the technical, operational, and ethical complexities involved. Moreover, the narrative of an arms race fueled by drone technology overlooks the broader geopolitical dynamics shaping international security, such as diplomatic efforts to mitigate tensions and the fact that both great powers are still economically interdependent.
Furthermore, the article raises concerns about the unchecked proliferation of drone swarms to rogue nations and non-state actors, yet it falls short in giving examples of those state and non-state actors. Additionally, it doesn’t discuss potential strategies for mitigating these risks. The absence of substantive discussion on regulatory frameworks, arms control agreements, or diplomatic initiatives to promote responsible use of autonomous weapons systems undermines the article’s analytical depth. While the portrayal of the U.S.-China competition as a driver of global instability is valid, a more balanced assessment would consider the role of international cooperation in addressing rising tension between two great powers over military technology.