Drones’ prominent role in the Russia-Ukraine War and air strikes across the Middle East have demonstrated that the future of warfare will be automated. Despite being the first to field robotic systems, the United States military has been slow to embrace autonomous capabilities at scale or take operators out of the decision-making loop. The Department of Defense’s hesitance is due, in part, to legitimate concerns about the reliability of automated capabilities. But adversaries like China or Russia may not share these concerns and are likely to deploy fully autonomous systems in future confrontations.
Senior Fellow Bryan Clark will sit down for a fireside chat with AeroVironment Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer Wahid Nawabi about how the US military can realize these opportunities in autonomous systems. Then a panel of experts from the DoD’s Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office (CDAO) and the defense industry will discuss the way forward for autonomy in US command and control systems, weapons, and vehicles as well as the role of data in achieving these goals.
Key Takeaways
1. China may be willing to delegate life-or-death decisions to autonomous systems. How should the US respond?
Dan Javorsek, president of EpiSci, notes that the Chinese Communist Party may not have the same legal, moral, and ethical reservations regarding autonomous systems that the West does, and that the People’s Liberation Army may embrace fully autonomous systems more rapidly.
Scott Gilloon, sector vice president of Air Force Strategic Development at General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, points out that the CCP is already adept at using data to manage its population. Whether or not the CCP’s approach extends to the PLA, the DoD needs to decide how to balance moral questions about fully autonomous systems with the practical risks of allowing China’s military to overtake US capabilities.
2. US policy needs to allow for innovation in full autonomy.
Autonomous systems need to be integrated and interoperable, require very little human interaction, and react quickly to threats in real time. Wahid Nawabi, the chairman, president, and CEO of AeroVironment, argued that technology is not the issue, and that it is policy that needs to evolve. Fortunately, the Department of Defense has taken significant steps in the past few months toward this goal.
3. The future of command and control will depend on rapidly adaptable software.
According to Lindsey Sheppard of the DoD’s Chief Digital and AI Office, US military planners have made rapid progress in conceptualizing and deploying command and control concepts through data-centric operational decision-making. To do so more effectively, the DoD is prioritizing access to live data and networks with quick iteration cycles relying on software-centric capabilities.
Agenda
9:00 a.m. | Fireside Chat
9:35 a.m. | Panel 1
Moderator
10:25 a.m. | Panel 2
Moderator
Join Hudson Institute for a discussion of how the US can build a more resilient and flexible energetics base—one that can meet sustained demand while accelerating the development and fielding of new capabilities.
Join Hudson Institute for a conference with leaders from industry, government, academia, and defense to discuss the latest developments in the US-China AI competition.
Join House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (AL-03) for a fireside discussion with Senior Fellow Nadia Schadlow on Congress’s role in revitalizing America’s defense industrial base.
Hudson welcomes Karel Řehka, former chief of the General Staff of the Czech Armed Forces, to discuss the changing security environment in Europe and its implications for the Czech Republic, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and the transatlantic alliance.
