My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Browne, the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, and the noble and gallant Lords, Lord Houghton and Lord Craig, for tabling this incredibly important and forward-thinking amendment and the ensuing debates around it. As we have heard, Amendment 59 seeks to force the Government to conduct
“a review of the implications of increasing autonomy associated with the use of artificial intelligence … for legal proceedings against armed forces personnel that arise from overseas operations, and produce recommendations for favourable legal environments for the United Kingdom’s armed forces operating overseas, including … how international and domestic legal frameworks governing overseas operations need to be updated in response to novel technologies”.
As a number of noble Lords have mentioned, this was first debated during the passage of the overseas operations Bill and, just like then, it is about future-proofing this legislation as well as ensuring protection for our personnel from the increased risks when using new technology. I understand my noble friend Lord Browne’s concerns about the mismatch between the need to be future-focused when it comes to technology and emerging threats, and the legislation we have in front of us.
Technology is not only changing the kinds of threats we face but changing warfare and overseas operations in general. Clive Baldwin of Human Rights Watch said that
“we are seeing a breakdown in what is the beginning and the end of an armed conflict, what is the battlefield and what decisions are made in which country … The artificial distinction of an overseas operation with a clear beginning, a clear theatre and a clear end is one that is very much breaking down.”—[Official Report, Commons, Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill Committee, 6/10/20; col. 67.]
I would be interested to hear the Minister’s comments on how the Government view this and what changes they have in mind.
The Prime Minister was surely right, when giving his speech on the integrated review last year, when he said that technologies “will revolutionise warfare” and announced
“a new centre dedicated to artificial intelligence”—[Official Report, Commons, 19/11/20; col. 489.]
and an RAF fighter system that will harness AI and drone technology. It sounds impressive—it is impressive—but, as my noble friend Lord Browne said, as military equipment gets upgraded, we do not know whether the Government necessarily plan to upgrade the legal frameworks for warfare and what this means for legal protections for our Armed Forces personnel.
5.45 pm
We absolutely must tackle vexatious claims and stop any cycle of investigations and reinvestigations, but how will claims against any operators or personnel operating new technology be handled? Service personnel who operate such technology deserve to be protected, and the legal framework needs to reflect that.
As new technology develops, so too must our domestic and international frameworks. The Final Report of the US National Security Commission on Artificial
Intelligence stated that the US commitment to international humanitarian law is of long standing, and that AI-enabled and autonomous weapons systems will not change that commitment.
As my noble friend Lord Browne said, NATO recently adopted its first ever AI strategy and stated that its aim is to
“accelerate AI adoption by enhancing key AI enablers and adapting policy, including by adopting Principles of Responsible Use for AI and by safeguarding against threats from malicious use of AI by state and non-state actors.”
It would be interesting to know how this strategy will be implemented by Her Majesty’s Government. As other noble Lords have asked, when will the Government’s own AI strategy be published? Will it include AI principles, as NATO’s strategy does? If so, does the Minister expect them to be similar to those adopted by NATO?
It will be interesting to hear the Minister’s reply. This is an extremely important amendment, and I thank my noble friend Lord Browne and the other noble Lords for bringing it forward.