Artificial intelligence (AI), a subset of machine learning,
has the potential to drastically impact a nation’s national security in various
ways. Coined as the next space race, the race for AI dominance is both intense
and necessary for nations to remain primary in anevolving global environment.
As technology develops so does the amount of virtualinformation and the ability
to operate at optimal levels when taking advantage of thisdata. Furthermore,
the proper use and implementation of AI can facilitate a nation in
theachievement of information, economic, and military superiority all
ingredients to maintaining a prominent place on the global stage. According to
Paul Scharre, “AI today is a very powerful technology. Many people compare it
to a new industrial revolution inits capacity to change things. It is poised
to change not only the way we think about productivity but also elements
of national power.”AI is not only the future for economic and commercial power,
but also has various military applications with regard to nationalsecurity for
each and every aspiring global power.
While the U.S. is the birthplace of AI, other states have
taken a serious approach to research and development considering the potential
global gains. Three of the world’s biggest players, U.S., Russia, and China,
are entrenched in non-kinetic battle to out-pace the other in AI development
and implementation. Moreover, due to theconsiderable advantages artificial
intelligence can provide it is now a race betweenthese players to master AI and
integrate this capability into military applications in orderto assert power
and influence globally. As AI becomes more ubiquitous, it is no longer
anext-generation design of science fiction. Its potential to provide strategic
advantage isclear. Thus, to capitalize on this potential strategic advantage,
the U.S. is seeking todevelop a deliberate strategy to position itself as the
permanent top-tier of AIimplementation.
Problem
The current AI reality is near-peer competitors are
leading or closing the gap with theU.S. Of note, Allen and Husain indicate the
problem is exacerbated by a lack of AI in thenational agenda, diminishing funds
for science and technology funding, and the publicavailability of AI research.
The U.S. has enjoyed a technological edge that, at times,enabled military
superiority against near-peers. However, there is argument that theU.S. is
losing grasp of that advantage. As Flournoy and Lyons indicate, China andRussia
are investing massively in research and development efforts to
producetechnologies and capabilities “specifically designed to blunt U.S.
strengths and exploitU.S. vulnerabilities.”
The technological capabilities once unique to the U.S.
are now proliferated across bothnation-states and other non-state actors. As
Allen and Chan indicate, “initially, technological progress will deliver the
greatest advantages to large, well-funded, andtechnologically sophisticated
militaries. As prices fall, states with budget-constrainedand less
technologically-advanced militaries will adopt the technology, as will
non-state actors.” As an example, the American use of unmanned aerial vehicles
in Iraq and
Afghanistan provided a technological advantage in the battle
space. But as prices forthis technology drop, non-state actors like the Islamic
State is making noteworthy use ofremotely-controlled aerial drones in its
military operations. While the aforementioned ispart of the issue, more
concerning is the fact that the Department of Defense (DoD) andU.S. defense
industry are no longer the epicenter for the development of
next-generation advancements. Rather, the most innovative development is occurring
morewith private commercial companies. Unlike China and Russia, the U.S.
governmentcannot completely direct the activities of industry for purely
governmental/militarypurposes. This has certainly been a major factor in
closing the gap in the AI race.Furthermore, the U.S. is falling short to China
in the quantity of studies producedregarding AI, deep-learning, and big data.
For example, the number of AI-related paperssubmitted to the International
Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) in 2017indicated
China totaled a majority 37 percent, whereas the U.S. took third position
atonly 18 percent. While quantity is not everything (U.S. researchers were
awarded the
most awards at IJCAI 2017, for example), China’s industry
innovations were formallymarked as “astonishing.”For these reasons, there are
various strategic challenges the U.S. must seek to overcome to maintain its
lead in the AI race.
Perspectives
Each of the three nations have taken divergent
perspectives on how to approach anddefine this problem. However, one common
theme among them is the understanding of AI’s importance as an instrument
of international competitiveness as well as a matter of national security.
Sadler writes, “failure to adapt and lead in this new reality risks theU.S.
ability to effectively respond and control the future battlefield.” However,
the U.S.can longer “spend its way ahead of these challenges.” The U.S. has
developed what istermed the third offset, which Louth and Taylor defined
as a policy shift that is a radicalstrategy to reform the way the U.S. delivers
defense capabilities to meet the perceivedchallenges of a fundamentally changed
threat environment. The continuous development and improvement of AI requires a
comprehensive plan and partnershipwith industry and academia. To cage this
issue two DOD-directed studies, the DefenseScience Board Summer Study on
Autonomy and the Long-Range Research andDevelopment Planning Program,
highlighted five critical areas for improvement: (1)autonomous deep-learning
systems,(2) human-machine collaboration, (3) assistedhuman operations, (4)
advanced human-machine combat teaming, and (5) network-enabled semi-autonomous
weapons.Similar to the U.S., Russian leadership has stated the importance of AI
on the modern battlefield. Russian President Vladimir Putin commented, “Whoever
becomes the leaderin this sphere (AI) will become the ruler of the world.”
Not merely rhetoric, Russia’sChief of General Staff, General Valery Gerasimov,
also predicted “a future battlefieldpopulated with learning machines.” As a
result of the Russian-Georgian war, Russiadeveloped a comprehensive military
modernization plan. Of note, a main staple in the2008 modernization plan was
the development of autonomous military technology and weapon systems. According
to Renz, “The achievements of the 2008 modernization program have been
well-documented and were demonstrated during the conflicts inUkraine and Syria.”
China, understanding the global impact of this issue, has dedicated
research, money,and education to a comprehensive state-sponsored plan.
China’s State Councilpublished a document in July of 2017
entitled, “New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan.” It laid
out a plan that takes a top-down approach to explicitly mapout the nation’s
development of AI, including goals reaching all the way to 2030. Chinese
leadership also highlights this priority as they indicate the necessity
forAI development:AI has become a new focus of international competition. AI is
a strategic technology that will lead in the future; the world’s major
developed countries are taking the development of AI as a major strategy to
enhance national competitiveness and protect nationalsecurity; intensifying the
introduction of plans and strategies for this core technology,top talent,
standards and regulations, etc.; and trying to seize the initiative in the
newround of international science and technology compete tion. (China’s State
Council 2017).The plan addresses everything from building basic AI theory to
partnerships withindustry to fostering educational programs and building an
AI-savvy society.
Recommendations
Recommendations to foster the U.S.’s AI advanceement include
focusing efforts onfurther proliferating Science, Technology, Engineering
and Math (STEM)programs to develop the next generation of developers. This
is similar to China’s AI developmentplan which calls to “accelerate the
training and gathering of high-end AI talent.” This lofty goal creates
sub-steps, one of which is to construct an AI academic discipline.While there
are STEM programs in the U.S., according to the U.S. Department of Education,
“The United States is falling behind internationally, ranking 29th in math and 22nd
in science among industrialized nations.” To maintain the top position in AI,
the U.S. must continue to develop and attract the top engineers and scientists.
Thisrequires both a deliberate plan for academic programs as well as funding
and incentivesto develop and maintain these programs across U.S. institutions.
Perhaps mostimportantly, the United States needs to figure out a strategy to
entice more topAmerican students to invest their time and attention to this
proposed new discipline.Chinese and Russian students easily outpace American
students in this area, especiallyin terms of pure numbers.Additionally, the
U.S. must research and capitalize on the dual-use capabilities of AI.Leading
companies such as Google and IBM have made enormous headway in thedevelopment
of algorithms and machine-learning. The Department of Defense shouldlevy these
commercial advances to determine relevant defense applications. However,part of
this partnership with industry must also consider the inherent national
securityrisks that AI development can present, thus introducing a regulatory
role for commercialAI development. Thus, the role of the U.S. government with
AI industry cannot bemerely as a consumer, but also as a regulatory agent.
The dangerous risk, of course, isthis effort to honor the principles of ethical
and transparent development will not bemirrored in the competitor nations of
Russia and China.Due to the population of China and lax data protection laws,
the U.S. has to developinnovative ways to overcome this challenge in terms of
machine-learning and artificial intelligence. China’s large population creates
a larger pool of people to develop as engineers as well as generates a massive
volume of data to glean from its internet users. Part of this solution is
investment. A White House report on AI indicated, “the entire U.S. government
spent roughly $1.1 billion on unclassified AI research anddevelopment in 2015,
while annual U.S. government spending on mathematics and computer science
R&D is $3 billion.” If the U.S. government considers AI an instrument of
national security, then it requires financial backing comparable to other
fifth-generation weapon systems. Furthermore, innovative programs such as the
DOD’s Project Maven must become a mainstay.Project Maven, a pilot program
implemented in April 2017, was mandated to producealgorithms to combat big data
and provide machine-learning to eliminate the manualhuman burden of watching
full-motion video feeds. The project was expected to providealgorithms to the
battlefield by December of 2018 and required partnership with fourunnamed
startup companies. The U.S. must implement more programs like this thatincite
partnership with industry to develop or re-design current technology for
militaryapplications. To maintain its technological advantage far into the future
the U.S. mustfacilitate expansive STEM programs, seek to capitalize on the
dual-use of some AItechnologies, provide fiscal support for AI research and
development, and implementexpansive, innovative partnership programs between
industry and the defense sector.Unfortunately, at the moment, all of these
aspects are being engaged and invested inonly partially. Meanwhile, countries
like Russia and China seem to be more successful in developing their own
versions, unencumbered by ‘obstacles’ like democracy, the rule of law, and the
unfettered free-market competition. The AI Race is upon us. And thefuture seems
to be a wild one indeed.
References
Allen, Greg,
and Taniel Chan. “Artificial Intelligence and National
Security.” Publication.
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs,
Harvard University. July 2017.Accessed April 9,2018.
Allen, John R., and Amir Husain. “The Next Space Race
is Artificial Intelligence.”
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/03/the-next-space-race-is-artificial-intelligence-and-america-is-losing-to-china/
China. State Council. Council Notice on the Issuance of the
Next Generation ArtificialIntelligence Development Plan. July 20, 2017.
Translated by RogierCreemers, GrahamWebster, Paul, Paul Triolo and Elsa Kania.
Doubleday, Justin. 2017. “Project Maven’ Sending First FMV
Algorithms to Warfightersin December.” Inside the Pentagon’s Inside the Army 29
(44). Accessed April 1,
2018.
Flournoy, Michèle A., and Robert P. Lyons. “Sustaining and
Enhancing the US Military’sTechnology Edge.” Strategic Studies Quarterly 10,
no. 2 (2016): 3-13. Accessed April12, 2018.
.Gams, Matjaz. 2017. “Editor -in-chief’s Introduction to
the Special Issue on“Superintelligence”, AI and an Overview of IJCAI 2017.”
Accessed April 14, 2018.
Informatica 41 (4): 383-386.
Louth, John, and Trevor Taylor. 2016. “The US Third Offset
Strategy.” RUSI Journal 161 (3): 66-71. DOI: 10.1080/03071847.2016.1193360.
Sadler, Brent D. 2016. “Fast Followers, Learning Machines,
and the Third OffsetStrategy.” JFQ: Joint Force Quar terly no. 83: 13-18.
Accessed April 13, 2018. AcademicSearch Premier, EBSCOhost.
Scharre, Paul, and SSQ. “Highlighting Artificial
Intelligence: An Interview with Paul
Scharre Director, Technology and National Security Program
Center for a NewAmerican Security Conducted 26 September 2017.” Strategic
Studies Quarterly 11, no. 4 (2017): 15-22. Accessed April 10, 2018.
“Science, Technology, Engineering and Math: Education for
Global Leadership.”
Science, Technology, Engineering and Math: Education for
Global Leadership. U.S.Department of Education. Accessed April 15, 2018.
No comments:
Post a Comment
you say