Command Responsibility: a Model For Defining Meaningful Human Control

Command Responsibility: A Model for Def‌ining

Meaningful Human Control

Matthew T. Miller*

In the relatively near future, the United States and other countries are likely to

develop varying levels of artif‌icial intelligence (AI) and integrate it into autono-

mous weapons.

1

There are signif‌icant voices, spearheaded by The Campaign to

Ban Killer Robots, advocating for a preemptive ban on these weapons.

2

The

opponents of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS) argue that it is unethi-

cal to allow a machine to decide when to kill and that AI will never be able to

adhere to International Humanitarian Law (IHL) obligations.

3

Although this

opposition campaign has not yet achieved its goal of a ban, it has prompted con-

siderable debate over the legality of developing and using LAWS. One of the

concepts that has arisen in this debate is a legal requirement for meaningful

human control (MHC) over LAWS.

4

The idea of MHC has gained traction within

discussions at the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons

(CCW), but the concept has its detractors.

5

One of those detractors is the United States, whose delegation to the CCW

Group of Governmental Experts continues to warn that MHC is an ambiguous

term that “obscures rather than clarif‌ies the genuine challenges” related to

LAWS.

6

Instead of human control, the U.S. argues that the key issue is ensuring

“machines help effectuate the intention of commanders and the operators of

weapon systems.”

7

The U.S. Department of Defense showed its focus on intent,

* Major Matthew Miller is a Judge Advocate in the U.S. Army and currently serves as the Chief of

the Operational Law Branch in the National Security Law Division of the Army’s Off‌ice of The Judge

Advocate General. Major Miller holds a Master of Laws (LL.M) in National Security Law from the

Georgetown Law Center and an LL.M. in Military Law from The Judge Advocate General’s Legal

Center and School. The views expressed in the paper are the author’s alone and do not necessarily ref‌lect

those of the author’s employer. © 2021, Matthew T. Miller.

1. Melissa K. Chan, China and the U.S. are Fighting a Major Battle Over Killer Robots and the

Future of AI, TIME, Sep. 13, 2019, https://perma.cc/62ZU-4FUZ.

2. See CAMPAIGN TO STOP KILLER ROBOTS, https://perma.cc/9RGG-A6ZU (providing an overview

of the campaign and its goals).

3. HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH, HEED THE CALL: A MORAL AND LEGAL IMPERATIVE TO BAN KILLER

ROBOTS 21 (2018), https://perma.cc/9WDZ-X655.

4. See Hayley Evans, Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems at the First and Second U.N. GGE

Meetings, LAWFARE (Apr. 9, 2018, 9:00 AM), https://perma.cc/9ARQ-3EHA (discussing numerous

states’ references to meaningful human control).

5. See Karl Chang, U.S. Mission to Int’l Orgs. in Geneva, Consideration of the Human Element in the

Use of Lethal Force, Address Before the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons Group of

Governmental Experts on Emerging Technologies in the Area of LAWS (Mar. 26, 2019) (discussing his

skepticism over the ability to determine the level of human control that is necessary to comply with

International Humanitarian Law).

6. Id.

7. Id.

533