Skip to main content

tv   Projekt Zukunft  Deutsche Welle  June 13, 2021 9:30pm-10:01pm CEST

9:30 pm
kind of action, do i fear that they prepare it and that fast for us to know that i think that capitalize nuclear weapon do spare us, they disperse is each nuclear forces back. and so the russians fears that the u. s . was thinking about nuclear weapons and that needs to rush and limit nuclear use. limited nuclear use. we've gone from a piece of mystery code found in the wrong place to a nuclear attack. how did that happen? well as to what government can't do in that situation, on price, pause, slow things down for a moment and peace them back together. because this is how a regional crisis can turn into a catastrophic war in the heat of a crisis with russia, the u. s. detect malware in its early warning networks, fearing it could be russian codes aimed at disabling systems. it was with the cyber intrusion of italian into russia. russia now sees its nuclear capabilities of being
9:31 pm
threatened, and scarcity, it's land based weapons. roy, possible. when this is picked up by the us, washington disperses its own nuclear forces for the same reason. fearing in a nuclear attack, russia far as the ultimate warning shop, a small nuclear missile. and it's a target that would involve minimal casualties, like a naval ship. to see, you can see the 1st uses nuclear weapons that literally kills no civilians use of military custody. i mean, relative, you know, we use of nuclear weapons against a ship off from any land. a military vessel might only kill, we say there's on board that vessel and those 2 days. while the immediate damage may be limited, these crosses the threshold called nuclear 1st use. which ever side does this? they've made the situation series. won't you cross that threshold?
9:32 pm
what nuclear 1st uses 2nd? you have to worry that it's going to escalate into something like 20 apocalyptic civilization. and so the real goal for me is to prevent any 1st use to talk. we've just seen how a cyber intrusion can escalate mercilessly to a nuclear conflict that nobody wanted. but the all things that the world could do now to prevent such a disaster from happening in the future will turn to those later. but 1st, let's leave this realm of scenarios and come back to the real world. and a war that's already happened ah, it's late 2020, and the war has broken out in a place. the world has forgotten, festering conflicts is abruptly it into full scale.
9:33 pm
ground 0 is not going to car above the disputed region in the caucuses. mountains for shows the by 2 former soviet republics, a menia and as by john. this looks like a textbook regional war over territory or ethnic a national pride for while the rest of the world is consumed by the panoramic. but for those who are paying attention, it provides a glimpse into the future the you can find it right here in the propaganda pumping out from the start of the war. that's by john's border patrol, post this video, and it hugh tube account. just as the conflict again the lyrics, who are russia, gene to istic fever with a mantra hate for the enemy. but look carefully
9:34 pm
and you'll see what makes this conflict a watershed in molten world for these trucks in the background. in this shot, you can just about what's in sight, then a launch in slow motion. that's what emerges is not a rocket or a missile. it has wings the beginning to unfold. just before the videos huts away, we can see enough to identify what it is. it was cool, loitering munition from israel stay, turn defense manufacturer, a modern may i present here on the company's promotional videos. so what loitering munitions can do once launched, they fly autonomously to a target area. but they can wait,
9:35 pm
all loiter in the sky for hours scanning for a target, typically air defense systems. once they find a target, they don't drop a ball, but fly right into it to destroy it on impact. it turned them the nickname can be county drunk. ah, in the war over the corner by these weapons didn't just makes a good propaganda. they made a real difference as a by john had spent years investing enjoy munitions analysis by us think tank so that they had more than 200 units across 4 different models. all of them 50 cases, it's ready designs only a single domestic mate model with a limited range. the really important aspect of the punch in the corner,
9:36 pm
in my view was the use of the law to ring initially the whole time because of the pretty fun. and what we can find is one of europe's leading experts, so military drones that also have been used in some, some way or form before. but here they're really shows their, their usefulness militarily speaking, of course it was show and how difficult this to fight against the systems the as as a by john celebration victory. you could even call in the corner car box. there's more that was one in part bio thomas weapons, little wonder the harp was on showed that day. and other military's were paying attention to the barnum since the ones that you could definitely take an interest in. roy bring an issue we have seeing more our forces around the world, acquiring or wanting to apply, are these, these large green munitions that are going to come by war america to showcase for
9:37 pm
the homeless weapons? with the clear message. this is the future with to future that's coming out as fast as ever more advanced models coming onto the market design to hit a wide range of targets and to have greater autonomy from the manufacturer. i even the markets, one of its motorists with the slogan, fire, and forget. just think about that already today. well, thomas weapon systems are being used to detect and destroy targets over long distances without human intervention. and this revolution is just getting started. turbocharged by artificial intelligence in the united states to major report from a national security commission on the artificial intelligence talks about a i enabling a new paradigm in war fighting and urges massive amounts of investments in the
9:38 pm
field. and fueling all of this is an intensifying global competition. the chinese and the russians have made it very clear that they intend to pursue the development of autonomous weapons march in russia. a format analyst at the cia cummins, emerging weapons technology, and washington's leading defense, thinktank. and they're already investing heavily in the research and development of those systems. it's not just the superpowers pining in britain's new defense strategy also puts a life front and center. and as we've already seen, israel is a leader in the autonomous weapons field. in fact, wherever you learn countries or with sizes jumping in the ones that they talk of this becoming an arms race, japanese foreign minister, high coma, is clear that non race already underway visit. we're right in the middle of it. that's the reality. we have to deal with if anything,
9:39 pm
this might go deeper than an arms race here. and there is a belief among the major bobbers that this could make a difference on the back in the future. so they are phonetically investing in it. indian diplomat, i'm seeing gill is the former chair of the us government experts group on lethal autonomous weapons. and this is a race which comes across the military and civilian speech because there's also the stems that this is, that might be trillion dollar, it's about the future of resilient economy, ai is rapidly entering everyday life. it may even unlock the phone in your pocket when you hold it up your face. as if creeping ubiquity of a, it's important. it means that development today technology cannot be contained. they're bound to bleed across between the civilian military field. whether we like
9:40 pm
it or not, it means that something as innocuous as the new year's celebration in edinburgh was in patrick's day. dublin can be powered by similar swimming technology to what the indian army showed off on its national day. in fact, swarming is one of the hottest areas of thomas weapons development right now. the u. s. navy has released push each of early demonstrations here fighter jets drop over a 100 tiny drones in mid flight. once they're out there, it's almost impossible for the human night to keep track of them. experts say they will make the weapons. you could take out an air defense system, for example, by just throw so much mass additive. so many numbers that the system is overwhelmed. this of course, has a lot of tactical benefits on the battlefield and no surprise,
9:41 pm
a lot of countries are, are very interested in pursuing these types of capabilities and feeding the momentum of this potential arms race. in order to fight these weapons, you need these weapons. humans don't have a chance when you're defending against a swarm, a human may be required to make that 1st decisions. i'm just not sure any human can keep up with a drug issue or speak to a critical emerging danger of autonomy weapons. weapons we've seen so far a capable of a high degree of autonomy, but they wouldn't be impossible for humanistic control. even a foreign forget weapon needs a human to fire it. they're still operating in a way that we can pretty much grasp. now let's think hate a decade or 2 into the future as
9:42 pm
a decade or 2 of rampant technological development and adoption of increasingly autonomous weapons. i think what is very likely that in 20 years time we will have more systems. now these necessary just airborne just drugs can also be ground system, surface vessels, etc. so different units operating together and carrying out the taxes together, which doesn't require quite a high level of enables us to fight the system. he will need the systems because human beings simply too slow. this is what potentially made drawing an arm sprays that you. some actors may be forced to adopt a certain level of autonomy at least defensively because human beings would not be able to, to deal with opponents attacks. and as pos as is as it would,
9:43 pm
it would be necessary. so it's definitely a big, a big concern here and that could have fateful consequences for how was begin. we could find ourselves in a situation where because of this, this problem of stevens, upon, on the system having to be counted by the systems. we could find ourselves in a situation where the systems basically react to each other in a way that that's not not which you know, in the, in the literature we call the flash war where you have to talk, or even just, you know, that you things that they will and that's one of the system reacts to that, another one that somebody opponent reacts to that it's not. and you have to estimation, potentially very far slash and slash wars where you basically have an accidental
9:44 pm
military conflict that you didn't didn't want. we've already seen something quite like this on the financial markets. to flash crash of 2010 likes more than the trillion dollars of the us stock market in just minutes. it was driven by trading algorithms feed off each other in a spiral. in a flash crash, trading could be whole kit to prevent disaster. the risk with a flash war is that they might be no pulling back. now i think faction corners higher above the regional bill where we're going to miss weapons may have to be in the future world with the risk of flash war, places like this could face even more instability even more conflicts. i think we are moving in the world into a world where systems will be more fun in this, but we need to make sure that we minimize the risk of, of unwanted escalation of the salad. she decided by
9:45 pm
and machines without any, any you know, but how do we do that? how do we prevent the worst? as we're about to find out the world is struggling to find a way the news. we've just seen glimpses of a future that nobody could want the war spinning out of control. even rushing out of nowhere. these are not the nightmares of science fiction that highly portable outcomes of the rapid technological change that we're witnessing right now . and there's no way to stop the technology that we've seen in this video. and we probably wouldn't want to have many positive applications that will come out of them. the urge and challenge is to find a way to keep them under control. my fear is that they will be more on predictability in how we get to conflict. so the box raise to the back to
9:46 pm
feet won't be clear to policy maker so they will not understand fully the risks of certain actions, hours, certain happenings, and backing, make the whole world a more dangerous place. i'm teaching gill with at the center of united nations effort to try to get a grip on our thomas weapons approach has that critic say is now on the brink of failure. this is where it all happens. the when buildings in geneva is here that delegates from un member state gather with experts, and it goes to talk about the future of a ton of warfare. this process is part of what's called a u. n. convention on certain conventional weapons diplomatic tongue twister. last in the 1980, to try to regulate, no nuclear weapons that were deemed so dangerous that they needed special attention . things like land mines and blinding lasers in 2014 lisa autonomous weapons
9:47 pm
made it onto their agenda. it's been very slow going. the process is yielded a set of guiding principles, saying federal thomas weapons should be subject to human rights law. and that humans must have ultimate responsibility for their use. but these guiding principles have no force. they just the basis for more discussions. if a campaign is calling from ban, that's not enough. we do get frustrated by the delays that have happened and the delay and moving from discussions to actual negotiations of a new treaty. the main problem with the form is that it operates by consensus so many anyone states can block progress and block that shift from discussions, negotiation only daugherty and lectures on human rights at harvard law school. and it's also a spokeswoman for the campaign to stop kill robots,
9:48 pm
a high profile coalition of n g o cheese map town principles for an international treaty. the overarching obligation of the treaty should be to maintain meaningful human control or the support and where it should be a treaty that governs all weapons with our operating with autonomy to choose targets and fire on them based on sensors inputs rather than human inputs. that idea of keeping meaningful human control is broadly echoed by many countries, but only 30 states support the campaign that mostly smaller nations, but include one giant in the form of china. beijing's true position is blood. china has called for a ban on earth express support for a band unused but has and my knowledge expressed the support for bad and development of production. and so we believe that you need to prevent,
9:49 pm
prohibit development as well as, as use of these inherently problematic systems. because once things are developed that you can use out of the bottle and the other great military powers onto tool keen on those sorts of limitations. either russia is accused of taking any opportunity to thwart the geneva talks process. but there are plenty of other objectives to russia has been, particularly the mentioned in subjection some of the other states developing autonomous weapon systems such as israel u. s, u, k. and, and others have so been unsupportive of a new treaty and, you know, have been express varying degrees of support for actually continuing discussion. so those are some of the roadblocks that we faced as things stand. the u. s. is highly unlikely to support a ban. rather, it says have its own principles which include human involvement. a ban on autonomous weapon systems is essentially infeasible just because the technology is
9:50 pm
out there. the department of defense has been very clear about its commitment to ethical uses of these technologies. where right now the position is that a human being has to be on the loop or in the loop when those weapons are use. so they won't be fully optimist in the sense that there won't be any human interaction with these weapons systems. but the reality is, the us, china and russia are competing so intensely in all areas of a technology that is questionable whether any of them was fine up to a treaty that significantly limits what they can do. aside from the lack of interest from crucial players, the challenge of tackling and intangible technology like a i is genuinely difficult. a lot of arms control systems in the pod, basically where about, you know, allocating a certain number of systems. you know,
9:51 pm
you are allowed 100 warheads of this one and you are an all 100 words has of this type. and we're basically counting. you can, you can do this with the ai enabled weapon systems that we're talking about because it doesn't matter what it looks like from the outside. but what's in there, germany is being quite active in trying to navigate around these problems. it's foreign minister says that the world has to find a way this is not just like we managed to do with nuclear weapons or the many decades we have to full into national treaties on new weapons technology. high co mass is a member of germany, social democrats, and just being a vocal advocate of arms control. indian dieticians must need to make clear that we agree that some developments that are technically possible and not acceptable and must be prohibited globally for associate and victorian internet. and in fact, the gentleman guzman has laid out his intention in the document that underpins the
9:52 pm
current coalition. we reject autonomous weapon systems that are outside human control. we want to prohibit them worldwide. now it sounds pretty clear, but even this is complicated. germany, for instance, does not support the campaign to stop kind of robots. it says there's a better way. so definitely, you know, at least up kelly and we don't reject it in substance. we're just saying that we want to have those to be included in the global controls, that we would need to ensure that it will turn to mush. weapon systems don't come in to use military powers that have technologically in a position, not just to develop a thomas weapons, but also to use them. we need to include them in georgia spectrum off. so this isn't just to debate about the rights and roman civil economists weapons. it's also a debate about the process. on the one hand, germany says that the big power must be on board for any agreement. they want that
9:53 pm
elusive consensus in the geneva process. on the other hand, the campaign to stop killer robot. this is a matter is to urge to wait. they say there's only time for one more round in geneva. and we feel that a states don't take action by, you know, at that point, that they should consider strongly. they should move outside of the convention, unconventional weapons, and look at other options. so there they could go to the un general assembly to negotiate a treaty. they could start an independent process, basically a form that is not down by consensus, but is guided by states that actually are serious about this issue and willing to take, develop strong standards to, to regulate these weapons. so the well doesn't agree on what to do about the autonomy weapons and they can't even agree on how to agree on what to do about them in this situation. is that any prospect of a solution? i think in the end, we may end up with rules or norms or agreements that are no more focused on
9:54 pm
specific uses and use cases rather than specific systems or technology. so you where your basic in your brain, for example, to use certain capabilities only in the past of way or only against machines rather than humans or only in certain contexts. but as you can imagine implementing that, 1st of all, agreeing to that and, and implementing that is, this is just much harder than, than some of the, the older arms control agreements. i just compounding this is the rock bottom level of trust between the major powers, right? now, and it's very us, china talked in the last game early, 2020, wondering, descended into a bit around evacuations. when there is a lack of trust, you tend to attribute all kinds of intentions to the other party. and you tend to over estimate what they might be doing and overshoot in terms of response. and to be frankly, the developments on the technology front are actually adding to the mistrust.
9:55 pm
preventing the kind of cyber disaster we looked at earlier would require the great powers to cooperate. but as a 1st step, there are things they could do independently. i think states need to think very carefully about how that type of operations could be misinterpreted in order to kind of fully analyze the benefits and risks before conducting them. you know, i think countries should adopt a rule that any before launching any cyber intrusions against nuclear mom and control, including julia, right, including the stuff is very detailed and conventional that should have to be signed off by a secretary of defense as a way of ensuring you know, these things are not routine. beyond that, the best we could hope for might be
9:56 pm
a behavioral norm. agreed between the u. s. russia and china that they would not loan cyber intrusions against each other's nuclear commander control systems. the idea would be that if you detect that another state in your network, the deal was often you could go off to their network. and so in this way, you'd hope to force disagree with true neutral deterrents. but remember that problem of entanglement, the systems involved in nuclear and non nuclear operations, that's going to make it very difficult to define, walk them all the control aspects are included in this kind of walk them under control. so you'd have to have some pretty difficult and sensitive negotiations. states are ready for the world. people interface era of great power competition. the challenge will be for the big 3 to call out areas like this, where they can put mutual interest above the visceral drive to be on top. that is the spirit of arms control. i don't, i don't think it's possible that you know,
9:57 pm
the parents, which, which are we get opponents and may eventually become even more adversarial can come together and agree on certain minimum requirements. simply because it is in everyone and for japanese foreign minister, the whole world has responsibility here. this develops an interest in the world must take an interest in the fact that we are moving towards a situation with cyber, autonomous weapons, where everyone can do as they please. we don't want lateral kind of just one minute . climate change serves is an ominous warning of what can happen when humanity sees a common threat on the horizon. but fail to act in time to stop it. the rios summit kicked off the un process of talk to tackle climate change way back in 1992. it took 22 years to get to the parents agreement. even that wasn't enough.
9:58 pm
it's already too late to prevent much of the devastation. scientists predicted right from the start. with the scenarios we've just seen the warning sides a justice clear and defining even more when antibiotics are out your shoes, the causes of multi resistance, are well known. the factory farming, poor hospital hygiene, premature reuse of antibiotics and deadly period
9:59 pm
keeps going in 30 minutes on d. w ah, was tips for your bucket magic corner check hotspots for, for me, and some great cultural mores to boot. you travel. we go. we don't want to see them, but they are there. all right, to be on the scene. our new global 3000 series of our we are facing. and the heroes taking
10:00 pm
a stand on the global $3000.00 series starts june 21st on d w. the news the z w. new was alive from berlin. the end of an era in israel, while makers have endorsed a government made off of an unlikely coalition of parties, united by just one goal out thanks. benjamin netanyahu. after 12 years in energy, 7 summit in england wraps up with some big promises leaders of the world's richest countries as they they will donate
10:01 pm
a 1000000000 covered 900 vaccine and take accent occur. carpet emissions will bring you analysis of the summit. the final.

27 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on