The Disarmament and International Security Committee (DISEC) of the General Assembly engage in discussion over specifics of the development of Lethal Autonomous Robots (LARS).
There has been some insightful debate, such as Canada who expressed concerns about the imbalance of power between the technologically countries such as the US and developing countries and believes that the current working paper does not fully address this issue.
However, little has been done to solve it and the topic has not been discussed in depth. The committee has since been sidetracked and has been debating religious differences, with input from both the Syrian Arab Republic and Iraq.
The debate has been divided into two major blocs where one side is lead by the Arabic countries and the opposition is composed mainly of western countries.
Three different resolutions are currently being developed. The first paper focuses on promoting peace in countries without disrupting national sovereignty.
Clauses include the implementation of international laws that enforce ethical use of LAR’s and details on the consequences of breaking the aforementioned laws. One problem that the first paper addresses is the utilization of Lethal Autonomous Robots by non-state actors, such as terrorist groups. Several amendments have been proposed as conflicting nations do not have faith in the provisions shown by the resolution paper.
The United States of America brings up a highly controversial point stating that the resolution put forward a clause that sanctions the acts of terrorist groups in committing crimes with Lethal Autonomous Robots. Nigeria, in response to the U.S.A’s confusion clarifies the situation defining the word sanction as “a threatened penalty for disobeying a law or rule” rather than an “official permission or approval for an action.”
There has been some insightful debate, such as Canada who expressed concerns about the imbalance of power between the technologically countries such as the US and developing countries and believes that the current working paper does not fully address this issue.
However, little has been done to solve it and the topic has not been discussed in depth. The committee has since been sidetracked and has been debating religious differences, with input from both the Syrian Arab Republic and Iraq.
The debate has been divided into two major blocs where one side is lead by the Arabic countries and the opposition is composed mainly of western countries.
Three different resolutions are currently being developed. The first paper focuses on promoting peace in countries without disrupting national sovereignty.
Clauses include the implementation of international laws that enforce ethical use of LAR’s and details on the consequences of breaking the aforementioned laws. One problem that the first paper addresses is the utilization of Lethal Autonomous Robots by non-state actors, such as terrorist groups. Several amendments have been proposed as conflicting nations do not have faith in the provisions shown by the resolution paper.
The United States of America brings up a highly controversial point stating that the resolution put forward a clause that sanctions the acts of terrorist groups in committing crimes with Lethal Autonomous Robots. Nigeria, in response to the U.S.A’s confusion clarifies the situation defining the word sanction as “a threatened penalty for disobeying a law or rule” rather than an “official permission or approval for an action.”