How Europe’s Urgent Need for Rearmament is Straining the Fabric of International Law

Power and Principles- this time with NATO (specifically the EU countries). Source: https://unsplash.com/photos/a-bunch-of-bullet-like-objects-on-a-blue-background--gk8BqMhYrw.

I. A New Era of European Defence: Motives and Obstacles

How is it that the subject of European rearmament has managed to find its way into domestic conversations with no accessible change in sight? 

What happens when a soldier lies in the face of adversity and is made to follow an AI-generated response that it is legally obligated to comply with? How do upcoming frameworks incorporate such complex dilemmas and distinct situations into binding policies? 

Prominent discussions surrounding the procurement of drones, the establishment of sophisticated AI systems, and quantum technology have dominated EU legal think tanks. With such grave concerns glaring at us, the modification of international mandates being well-equipped to efficiently monitor such cohesive advancements still comes across as ambiguous. 

As stated definitively in the ASSR ‘Rearming Europe and the Future of European and International Law’ conference, the European Union wants to reduce its dependence on the United States and will acquire additional funds that are currently valued at roughly 800 billion euros, with external financing of 150 billion euros.

Such logistical executions can provoke debates and discussions regarding a vacuum in the governance and safeguarding of public interests. Not only this, but the need for speedy rearmament sparks debate over the relevance of international laws and rules as a whole.

Subsequently, another link that can be sufficiently inferred is whether the massive investments by the European Union in its security system lead to a potential rearmament of the world.

There, however, are significant reasons and evidence for one to think so. Raw materials required for the construction of such precise technological developments, as well as the proficiency and techniques essential to bring projects to life, cannot be made possible without global interactions, consent, and transactions. Corporate firms and big business houses are often seen to act persuasively when it comes to the formulation of policies and allocation of funds or expertise.

Thus, it is vital to increase awareness about the fact that the aims and very definition of a company's profits are vastly different from those of a state in deciding such matters. In addition, this creates a need to further solidify “corporate due diligence in defense and dual-use industries.”

II. Accountability and Legal Vacuums

Definite and firm equations between the government and corporations lead to an additional blurring of boundaries regarding appointing limitations and liabilities when underlying risk assessments are undertaken from the perspective of international humanitarian and criminal law. 

Throughout the course of deliberations, considerable emphasis was placed on a crucial lens of possible challenges that might arise in the sphere of mitigating detrimental impacts within and outside the European Union when it comes to the implementation of such comprehensive laws.

As is often noticed, such evolutionary steps overlook threats that emerge at a broader scale. There is a risk that is then observed in the act of taking accountability, and as a consequence, the masses are left at the mercy of their own understanding of highly polished and processed information, rendering them vulnerable in precarious circumstances. Furthermore, this is the area that policymakers are now taking into account and placing assertive significance on.

However, first, the “fragmented” policies need to be consolidated and should act as a unifying umbrella under which all member states are enabled to express their concerns and decisions voluntarily. Past reliance on the United States and having relatively stable geopolitical conditions have made the defence market in Europe weaker in terms of procurement, technological gaps, and home-country bias; however, current circumstances push the Union to pool its resources in order to benefit from economies of scale and cost reductions.

III. A Global Ripple Effect and the Corporate World's Role

Realising this, countries have already begun pooling up, and this is shown evidently through their increased GDP percentage expenditure in defence. For example, Poland and most Baltic regions demonstrate an increase of more than 3% of their GDP being spent on military activities, while countries such as Germany and Belgium have reported an increase of around 2.4% and 2.1%, respectively.

This shows that the realisation of military independence is slowly sinking into the expenditure of these countries; however, a consolidated partnership and framework are yet to be formulated.

The monotonous repetition of sanctions and negotiations does not advocate enough for human, community, and societal welfare. For effective inclusivity and transparency, concrete measures and mechanisms for intertwined relations between corporations and the state are established on neutral grounds, where both parties benefit from the relationship without compromising humanity, international cooperation, and collaboration.

IV. The Human Cost and Ethical Crisis of AI

The human element should no longer be the scapegoat for policies that may be used to feed one’s personal agendas but instead be the end to the means ultimately deployed by institutions such as the United Nations and other forums of international justice and peace. 

After further discussion, a consensus emerged in favour of introducing a comprehensive and rigorous certification system. This decision was made with special regard to the emotionally and morally synthesised choice faced by people on the front line, because, as we know, a battlefield is no space for innovation but rather a moment where meticulous and pivotal decisions are made.

What tests and qualifications does an AI system really have to go through to be considered credible enough to generate such answers that are capable of resembling and effectively addressing the multifaceted situation one is in? 

When laws struggle to adapt to advancements made in their nation’s or organization's elaborate systems, it's needless to say that a government feeling desperate and feeble in the face of technological innovation is inevitable. If not for the benefit of anything else, then at least for the sake of debates to continue without bloodshed, victories that don’t stand on wars, and punishments based on “misinterpretation” of the use of AI as a novel weapon in contemporary times. And thus, it is important to define what “peacekeeping” or “adherence to human rights and laws” means universally.