In 2012, Human Rights Watch (HRW) issued a call for a global ban on autonomous weapons. A new NGO, the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots (CSKR) was formed in October 2012 to promote such a ban. In 2015, the Future of Life Institute (FLI) issued a new call for a ban, though now restricted to offensive autonomous weapons. The FLI proposal garnered the support of tens of thousands of signatories, including such prominent figures as Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking, and generated considerable attention in the international press and on social media. Meanwhile, the CSKR helped to organize “informal meetings of experts” starting in 2014 in Geneva under the auspices of the UN’s Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (CCW) for the purpose of exploring the possibility of adding an autonomous weapons ban to existing bans on land mines and blinding lasers, among other banned or restricted weapons. In 2017 these sessions were elevated to the level of annual and still ongoing meetings of a formally constituted Group of Governmental Experts (GGE). Against the background of these developments on the international legal front, an extensive literature on the ethics and policy of autonomous weapons has emerged and media attention to the debate has intensified. At least in the public arena, momentum seems to be building for some kind of ban.

Is a ban the right way to go? I think not. There are obvious questions of law, policy, and ethics that must be weighed regarding autonomous weapons. But, in my opinion, imposing a total ban, even if only a ban on offensive autonomous weapons, risks our depriving ourselves of tools that can continue the progress already made with the advent of “smart” weapons in reducing the suffering that will always be part of war, especially by way of still further reductions in harm to non-combatants. Moreover, as I will argue, we can construct effective means for norming the use of autonomous weapons short of a total ban by building upon the foundation of existing requirements stipulated in Article 36 of Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions that all new weapons technologies be reviewed for compliance with the International Law of Armed Conflict (ILOAC) and International Humanitarian Law (IHL).

I begin with a critical review of several of the most commonly encountered arguments in favor of a ban. That is followed by a discussion of the moral opportunities afforded by enhanced autonomy. I conclude with a concrete policy proposal based upon the principle of Article 36 review.