AUTONOMOUS WEAPONS
Since the beginning of the 21st century, the use of unmanned armed vehicles and technological advances have led researchers and organizations to seek the development of autonomous weapons systems. Such weapons will be capable of targeting and firing at targets without any human intervention, being true killer robots and bringing new legal and humanitarian challenges.
PROBLEM
Replacing human troops with machines may make the decision to go to war easier. Robots do not possess the human judgment necessary to analyze complex situations, distinguish between civilians and combatants, and assess the proportionality of an attack, as required by international humanitarian law.
The use of autonomous weapons will also make it more difficult to identify who is responsible for attacks, since it is not clear who will be legally accountable for the robot’s actions: the commander, the programmer, the manufacturing company, or the robot itself. All of this will leave the civilian population more vulnerable, given the greater ease of going to war and the lack of incentives to comply with the laws of war.
CAMPAIGN
A Stop Killer Robots (Campanha contra Robôs Assassinos) foi criada em 2013 com o objetivo de banir preventivamente as armas letais autônomas. Ela é uma coalizão global formada por mais de 60 organizações presentes em 26 países.
A Stop Killer Robots advoga pela inclusão desse tema nos foros de discussão internacionais e para que os países trabalhem pelo banimento total das armas letais autônomas, levando em consideração as consequências éticas, legais, políticas e técnicas do uso dessas armas. Além disso, ela representa setores da sociedade civil nas conferências diplomáticas internacionais ocorridas no âmbito da ONU.
SOLUTION
The only way to prevent machines from making decisions about wartime attacks and to ensure the protection of civilians is through a preemptive and total ban on the development, production, and use of lethal autonomous weapons. This can be achieved through an international treaty or through national measures adopted individually by States.
Allowing decisions of war to be made by autonomous machines crosses ethical and moral boundaries. Human control over any weapon of combat is essential to ensure respect for humanitarian principles and effective legal accountability.
In 2013, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Professor Christof Heyns, published a report on lethal autonomous weapons, recommending that all States: i) establish a moratorium on these weapons, ii) commit to respecting the rules of international humanitarian law, iii) be transparent about their autonomous weapons programs, and iv) participate in the international debate on the subject. Complying with these recommendations is a good starting point for addressing these new challenges.
AND BRAZIL?
Brazil has been an active advocate for the international regulation of lethal autonomous weapons systems. It regularly participates in meetings of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) and supports the creation of a legally binding instrument on the issue. In 2024, Brazil co-sponsored and voted in favor of Resolution L.77 at the 79th UN General Assembly, which recognizes the risks these systems pose to global and regional security and highlights the importance of human control in the use of force, in accordance with international law. The country also supported UN Resolution 78/241, which requested a report from the Secretary-General on the ethical, legal, humanitarian, and technological challenges of autonomous weapons.
Since 2020, Brazil has reiterated its clear position in favor of a legal instrument that ensures meaningful human control over the critical functions of these systems. The country warns that rapid technological advances may outpace diplomatic efforts and compromise human rights, international humanitarian law, and human dignity. In its statements, Brazil has also emphasized that, while artificial intelligence can process large volumes of data and support decision-making, it also increases the risks of unpredictability, bias, and conflict escalation, requiring urgent regulation