Last week, more than 100 technology leaders wrote an open letter calling on the United Nations to outlaw so-called lethal autonomous weapons as technological advancements mean militaries across the world could soon be filled with artificially intelligent war machines.
General Sir Richard Barrons, who until last year led the team responsible for preparing future conflict, said the military was facing a revolution and any hopes of an international ban are futile because it is likely to be flouted by unscrupulous nations.
The potential advantages of the new technology, which will see robots created that are capable of making decisions, learning and killing without any human control, will put massive pressure on militaries fearful of falling behind their international rivals.
Sir Richard told the Telegraph: “If you ask the Ministry of Defence here, they will say as a matter of policy we are not going to do autonomous capability. There will always be a man in the loop.
“But if you ask other people around the world, they don’t have the same value struggle.
“Even if you don’t plan to have this capability yourself, you are going to have to deal with the fact that machines are going to turn up that are designed to be lethal and there’s no man controlling them at the time.”
With driverless vehicles and computer networks capable of learning already being developed for the civilian market, Sir Richard believes pressure will mount on the defence industries to make use of the new technology soon, particularly with the anticipated economic benefits.
Although some situations will always require a degree of human control, the retired senior officer believes armed machines could be used to guard nuclear reactors or even keep people out of restricted areas, such as the demilitarised zone (DMZ) that separates North and South Korea.
He said machines could replace bored 19-year-olds standing on sentry duty.
Sir Richard said: “Being 19-year-olds they think about mobile phones and sex as much as they think about the opposition.
“They get hot, they get cold, so their attention span is shorter and a machine doesn’t blink, doesn’t get hot, doesn’t get cold and just follows the rules. In a defined space like the DMZ it’s as simple as: see something move and shoot at it.
“Why would you send a 19-year-old with a rifle into a house first to see if anything is in there if you could send a machine and there are many, many many examples in the land and maritime environments.”
Sir Richard warned the temptation to replace guards with machines along the Korean border is “terrific”.
He said: “The temptation to have them I think will be terrific because they will be more effective, they will be cheaper, they will take people out of harm’s way and will give you bigger armed forces, so the pressure to have them will only grow.
“You find ways of delivering the military output that you want at much cheaper cost. You are buying a machine that is essentially civilian technology bundled into a military role.
“There you’ve got a machine that doesn’t get bored, that doesn’t have to be replaced when it resigns early, that never has a pension, or a hospital. This is a really powerful factor.”
Liz Quintana, director of military science at the Royal United Services Institute said: “It’s one thing to actually agree on a ban and it’s another to implement it.
“The rate of advancing technology and benefits from the technology are such in all sectors that it will be difficult to enforce.”