The Defense Ministry has decided to introduce artificial intelligence in the Self-Defense Forces’ command and control.
Such a move may have been unavoidable given the rapid spread of AI utilization in military affairs around the world.
But discussions must continue on such topics as how to ensure human involvement, what effect depending on a foreign computer system will have on autonomy and what form democratic control should take.
The U.S. military uses Palantir Technologies Inc.’s “Maven Smart System.”
That system rapidly integrates and analyzes a huge amount of data, such as satellite and drone images as well as communication information, selects targets and proposes the most effective attack method.
There are reports that the system was used in the military action in Venezuela as well as the attack on Iran.
It has also been pointed out that Palantir technology has been used by Ukraine in its counterattack against Russia.
The government insists that AI will only support analysis and operational planning and that final decisions will be made by humans.
But because it will be difficult for humans to reassess in a short time the recommendation made by AI, they may end up simply going along with that judgment.
AI is not infallible so there are doubts as to whether it can accurately differentiate between civilians and miliary personnel.
There is also the issue of hallucination in which AI provides a mistaken response in a plausible manner.
There is also the possibility of not being able to explain why AI made a mistaken judgment, leading to a “black box problem.”
Because Palantir’s AI has already been used in joint exercises involving the SDF and the U.S. military, it can be considered a leading candidate should the SDF decide to use such technology.
But if the computer system at the core of command and control is the product of a foreign company, albeit one from an ally, there is the slim possibility of suspension of service or functional restrictions being made by the company or the government of another nation.
That would affect national defense, which is a core component of state sovereignty.
Concerns have also been raised about information leakage because confidential data will be provided.
There is also the question of whether Japan’s legal structure based on an exclusively defensive posture can coexist with a U.S.-made product that places priority on military rationality.
At the same time, there is no telling if Japan can catch up with the technology and data accumulated by a U.S. company based on actual experience.
There are strong calls from within the government and ruling coalition for a domestic computer system so consideration has been given to using a combined system or to replace the system in the future with a domestic one.
There will be a need to demarcate what can be left up to a foreign nation and where an uncrossable line exists.
Introducing AI into command and control is not simply about using new technology, but is also an issue about state sovereignty and the character of its defense.
Hasty decisions should be avoided and thorough discussions held on such topics as the extent to which the technology will be used, where responsibility would lie, how humans would be involved and the level of dependence on a foreign nation.
–The Asahi Shimbun, July 15