Is Remote Warfare Moral

Christine Sixta Rinehart

Source Link

In the book Is Remote Warfare Moral?, Joseph Chapa provides a firsthand account of remote warfare based on his own experiences in the United States Air Force. The book’s central question on the morality of remote warfare is explored through his use of real-world experiences as a drone pilot and Air Force officer that are informed by the research expertise of an academic. While the book demystifies some mysteries of remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) warfare, it also analyzes remote warfare within Just War Theory and the academic disciplines of philosophy and psychology. The result is a profound ethical analysis of RPA warfare at both strategic and tactical levels from the eyes of a pilot and airman.

In Chapter One, Chapa provides a history of the Predator, and its successor the Reaper, as well as of RPA warfare more generally. Chapter Two explores the concept of “riskless warfare;” asking if a pilot or sensor operator can really be a warrior if they are not exposed to death or injury. Chapa argues the RPA pilots have a warrior ethos that allows them to take life without giving up their humanity; for Chapa they are warriors in the historical sense of the term. They are not only able to take lives but also give their lives in war in return. In Chapter Three, Chapa discusses the morality and psychology of RPA warfare. Critics of RPA warfare have pointed out the distance of RPA pilots from the fight. Although RPA pilots can be as much as eight thousand miles away from the physical location of the target, their vision is only eighteen inches away. This brings up the concept of moral injury as experienced by RPA pilots, who can participate in actions that violate their deeply held views of how human beings should be treated. Furthermore, Chapa concludes that the old adage of a PlayStation mentality and the PTSD narratives for RPA pilots are neither appropriate nor relevant:

“The PlayStation mentality and the PTSD narratives are insufficient to capture the nuances of psychological distance in remote warfare. With some exceptions, the crews are emotionally engaged in their lethal work yet not ravaged by PTSD.”[1]

In Chapter 4, the decision of whom to target and the justification of killing are researched. Chapa advocates that we should decide first whether the target is a threat and second whether the use of force is proportional and necessary to neutralize it. In Chapter Five, the author introduces the role of the Joint Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC) who grants airmen the ability to release a weapon with the consent of the ground force’s commander. RPA pilots and sensor operators can disagree with the JTACs’ decisions, although this may cause an awkward situation for all parties involved. Chapa defines a judgment gap between the parties as “the distance between the point of application of human judgment and the effects of judgment.”[2] To him, RPA pilots and sensor operators make decisions on whom to target and their judgment gap is much smaller than traditional soldiers. Chapter Six addresses whether RPA warfare is cowardly and Chapa argues that both traditional warriors (like infantrymen) and RPA warriors are held to similar standards. Unlike traditional warriors, RPA warriors must respect human dignity to protect themselves from the moral injury of war. Moral injury occurs when a person does, participates in, or witnesses actions that transgress their value system of how human beings should be treated. The future of RPA warfare is addressed in Chapter Seven. Chapa cautions that the United States needs to be careful with the use of artificial intelligence and the proliferation of RPA to other nations. As the RPA battlefield enlarges, so will the need for the evaluation of ethics, which will include necessary training and preparation for decision makers and leadership. Chapa writes:

The restraints inherent in just war theory remain our best hope of preventing the calamities of war in the age of artificial intelligence. In an era in which machines that learn will increasingly perform tasks we once thought suitable only for humans, we might take up the false belief that we can let our ethical guard down, or that we can trust the machines to act as our surrogates in the pursuit of the good. But this would be a mistake. In the looming age of artificial intelligence and war, decision makers from the army private in the field to the combatant command leadership, and even to the elected and appointed civilians who lead and oversee the military will need more training and preparation in ethics, not less.[3]

Is Remote Warfare Moral? is a thoughtful and necessary contribution to the literature on RPA warfare. The book’s biggest contribution is that of a primary source from a seasoned veteran and RPA instructor in the United States Air Force. The book also elucidates some of the ambiguity surrounding RPA warfare. The book is well-sourced and Chapa’s writing style is easy to understand for any audience. However, like any terrific book, there are always a few suggestions for improvement:

Considering that the author has a professional grasp of RPA protocol, it would have been helpful to see policy prescriptions or analysis regarding the role of RPA in foreign policy. Has the United States ethically used RPA in the War on Terror? Does Chapa have any insight on how to better use RPA concerning counterterrorism, reconnaissance, or support? Also, what type of specific ethical considerations does he predict RPA will need in the future? If policy makers and military leaders need more training regarding RPA ethics, what does that look like? What will the future RPA battlefield look like in the estimation of the author?

Airman 1st Class Caleb Force assists First Lieutenant Jorden Smith, an MQ-1B Predator pilot, in locating simulated targets during a training mission conducted inside the simulators at Creech Air Force Base, Nev. (USAF/Senior Airman Nadine Y. Barclay)

Also, the roles of sensor operators in RPA could have been more developed in the book. Chapa mentions sensor operators in his stories but their valuable roles in decision-making required more elaboration. The media attention concerning RPA focuses traditionally on the pilots but the sensor operators guide Hellfire Missiles and 500-pound bombs towards targets. The ethical views of sensor operators also need exploration. In closing, Is Remote Warfare Moral? is a profound work and goes farther than any other academic book has gone in deeply analyzing the ethics of remote warfare. The personal experience of Chapa alone makes this book desirable for anyone interested in RPA warfare, AI, or the ethics of warfare in general. Chapa finally gives a necessary voice to the military personnel and professionals who engage in RPA warfare daily.