Prof. Michael W. Lewis Ohio Northern University College of Law

Legality of Armed Drones Armed drones are legally equivalent to manned combat aircraft Subject to same necessity and proportionality requirements Operators treated as combatants Legal equivalency is appropriate unless drones become “untethered”

Legality of Armed Drones Armed drones are legally equivalent to manned combat aircraft Subject to same necessity and proportionality requirements Operators treated as combatants Legal equivalency is appropriate unless drones become “untethered”

Drone Misconceptions Used primarily to save aircrew - No fixed wing aircraft lost to enemy fire in Afghanistan in over 10 years Like a video game - Fostered by Philip Alston’s UN report that mentioned concerns about a “Playstation Mentality” - In fact drone operators suffer PTSD at higher rates than some combat units from Iraq and Afghanistan

Drone Misconceptions Massive civilian casualties Three sources for assessing drone casualties - New America Foundation - Long War Journal  - The Bureau for Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) Counterinsurgencies around the world: Sri Lanka/Tamil Tigers Russia/Chechnya (x2) Israel/Hezbollah Israel/Hamas Colombia/FARC

Drone Misconceptions Counterinsurgencies around the world: Sri Lanka/Tamil Tigers Russia/Chechnya (x2) Israel/Hezbollah Israel/Hamas Colombia/FARC In all of these conflicts more civilians than combatants have been killed. As high as 80-90% of the casualties in some of these conflicts were civilians

Drone Misconceptions Drones are very different TBIJ overall numbers show the civilian casualty rate for drones at ~20% More significantly over the last two years in Pakistan that number is <3% 3% !!!! Unparalleled discrimination between civilians and targetable individuals

Drone Misconceptions They are autonomous weapons No, they are merely remotely piloted. Almost everything they do is based on direct human input Some rudimentary autonomous functions - Auto-pilot/altitude hold - RTB in event of signal loss - Some automation in landing

Autonomous Weapons Why would we want them? Would they be legal?

Why Would We Want Them? OODA Loops - Observe - Orient - Decide - Act Tactical and Strategic Applications - Fighter to fighter - Entire theater of war Whoever completes OODA faster has a huge advantage and automation helps that

Why Would We Want Them? Already use automation to Observe, Orient and in many cases Decide Certain defensive weapons systems like CIWS also Act How much of a difference is there between Decide and Act? Does it matter if a human pushes the button?

Would They be Legal? They would have to comply with standards of military necessity and proportionality How could machines ever do that? - Who do you trust to ID a target more, sniper or computer? - Facial recognition software and advanced biometrics could arguably make the computer more reliable What about crowded urban environments? - Clearly most challenging environment for anyone, man or machine - No serious claim they are ready for this yet - That doesn’t mean they can’t be used elsewhere

Possible Uses Near Term Continued use as point defense systems, particularly in the naval environment Area denial weapons, particularly in desert, rural or DMZ environment Defensive use against machines rather than personnel - Anti-aircraft - Anti-ship -Anti-tank