Review of the 7th Annual SYP Conference: AI, Peace and Security

Published on 9th February 2024 in Emerging Technologies and the Impact on Strategic Stability, Uncategorised, Disarmament, Ethics of Science, Recent events, Student Young Pugwash Events

1. Summary review of the 7th Annual SYP Conference: ‘AI: Implications for peace and security’

2. Conference materials: video / pictures / slides / presenter contact details

1. Conference Review

“Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents enormous global opportunities: it has the potential to transform and enhance human wellbeing, peace and prosperity”.

As highlighted in the Bletchley Declaration – the outcome of the AI Safety Summit, hosted by the UK Government in November 2023 and held at the home of the World War II codebreakers – AI, peace and security are inextricably linked. But in what ways? For example, how can this technology help us create a more peaceful world? What are the military and security implications of AI? How does AI interact with nuclear weapons? And how should this technology be regulated?

These were the questions asked of participants at Student and Young Pugwash’s ‘Artificial Intelligence, Peace and Security Conference’. The conference’s keynote panel boasted four expert speakers who provided an overview of the political, legal, ethical and technical issues AI raises for society. Speakers included: Professor Elena Simperl (King’s College London), Rachel Coldicutt (Careful Industries), Dr Matt Mahmoudi (Amnesty International), and Dr Peter Burt (Drone Wars UK). This panel was followed by a range of presentations from students and young professionals, both from the UK and several other countries.

For some of the participants, the focus was on how AI could actively promote peace. Sarah Weiler examined how AI has supported many of the UN’s peacebuilding efforts, from satellite imagery in humanitarian situations to natural language processing in diplomatic negotiations. However, the majority of presentations focused on the threat this technology poses to peace. For Dekai Liu, the domestic surveillance threat is a primary concern. Looking at the issue through a Foucauldian lens, Liu argues that Large Language Models (LLMs) have heightened the risk of Orwell’s ‘Big Brother’ becoming a reality, as illustrated by the use of Instant Messenger to bolster state’s surveillance capabilities. Jan Quosdorf and Vincent Tadday’s presentation took a more international approach. Using US defense contractor Anduril as a case-study, they argued that the adoption of AI systems in conflict has far outpaced Europe’s ability to regulate it, and that this void must be filled immediately.

The interplay between AI and nuclear weapons was at the core of a large bulk of the submissions. Whilst AI can improve remote sensing for arms control and treaty verification, Jingjie He made the case that it also threatens to undermine these very same systems. ‘Counter-AI tactics’ come in various forms, He claims, from poisoning the training data to inferring the architecture of the LLMs in an effort to steal the models. Economics PhD researcher Joel Christoph examined the possibilities for AI to reduce nuclear risk, from ameliorating verification mechanisms to enabling better diplomacy through predictive analytics. Also recommending the uptake of AI in this field – so long as it includes concomitant transparency measures – Syeda Saba Batool’s ‘AI for Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy’ explored how AI’s ability to analyse vast swathes of diverse data can support the work of nuclear inspectors.

Beyond the nuclear realm, much of the work revolved around regulation of AI writ large. For some, successful regulation requires a look to the past. Veerle Moyson argued that the answer to regulating Autonomous Weapon Systems (AWS) lies in the nuclear regime, particularly if principles such as humanitarianism, equality of states, and long-term sustainability are drawn on. Arian Ng suggested establishing a committee of powerful nation-states that is undergirded by shared ethical standards and transparent communication. Multilateralism was a key theme in the presentations, with Mahmoud Javadi emphasising its importance. Javadi concluded with a bold trifecta of recommendations for global military AI governance: ‘legal empathy’, an ‘ambitious-cum-humble mindset’ and ‘differentiation’. Writing from a more legalistic standpoint, PhD student Marco Sanchi honed in on the ‘crisis of causality’ that would arise if an AI system commits a war crime. Sanchi’s answer: allocating liability to those responsible. For example, Sanchi proposes the creation of an International Tribunal for Autonomous Weapons and the employment of ‘Administrative / Military Liability’.

Offering a more cautionary view, Océane Van Geluwe warned against overstating the capabilities of these systems. Notwithstanding the risks posed by AI, it is crucial to separate myth from reality, Geluwe claimed, and focus on establishing agile regulatory frameworks that can keep up with the pace of change.

We hope the event will encourage further academic work into the intersection of AI, peace and security, with attention to both the opportunities and risks that this technology presents.

*Thanks to Max Murphy for his summary review of the conference

2. Conference materials

NB all videos are available on our YouTube channel

i) Keynote panel: 10.00 – 11.30

Professor Elena Simperl (Department of Informatics, King’s College London)

‘An introduction to AI and its societal challenges’

Rachel Coldicutt (Executive Director, Careful Industries & Promising Trouble)

‘AI, the tech community and ethics’

Slides

Dr Matt Mahmoudi (Researcher / Adviser, Amnesty International, Tech Big Data, Artificial Intelligence & Human Rights)

‘AI, human rights, conflict and armed forces’

LinkedIn: https://uk.linkedin.com/in/mattmoudi

X: @DocMattMoudi

Dr Peter Burt (Drone Wars UK)

‘AI and the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots’

Chair: Dr Tim Street (Coordinator, Student / Young Pugwash)

Email: syp@britishpugwash.org

X: @SYPugwash_uk

ii) First presenter panel: 11.45 – 13.00

Marco Sanchi (PhD Student, AI & Society, University of Bologna – University of Pisa)

‘Artificial Intelligence War Crimes: Regulating Accountability’

Abstract

Slides

UniBo academic profile

Jan Quosdorf & Vincent Tadday (MA Candidate International Affairs, King’s College London / Peace and Security Studies, Hamburg University; Sciences Po, MPP Candidate Politics and Public Policy / Hertie School, MPP Candidate Public Policy )

‘How AI is revolutionising the Western Defense Industry – The case of Anduril and Implications for Europe’

Abstract

Slides

VT: X: @vincenttadday; LinkedIn; Website: www.vincenttadday.com

JQ: X: @GermanSYP; LinkedIn