AI Warfare Ethics: The Space Warfare Trilogy, #3

By Guilin Du

        As artificial intelligence assumes greater control over military decision-making, the ethical foundations of warfare are being rewritten. In "AI Warfare Ethics," Guilin Du presents a rigorous exploration of the ethical dilemmas surrounding AI in modern and future war.

        This book challenges conventional military ethics and investigates the legitimacy of AI-led war adjudication, autonomous combat morality, and the ethical governance of AI warfare. It explores:

• AI as an ethical subject in war: Can AI assume independent moral responsibility?

• AI war crimes adjudication: Should AI determine accountability in war tribunals?

• Ethical singularity in warfare: Will AI ethics surpass human morality?

• AI in autonomous lethal decision-making: How should AI handle war orders?

• AI vs human ethics in war governance: Who holds the ultimate authority?

• Global governance and AI warfare: Will AI redefine international war laws?

        The automation of war ethics is no longer theoretical—it is the future. "AI Warfare Ethics" provides a comprehensive framework for policymakers, military leaders, ethicists, and AI researchers to navigate the coming transformation of war morality.

        Essential reading for those seeking to understand how AI will reshape military responsibility, legality, and global security ethics in the age of autonomous warfare.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Guilin Du
• Release date: Feb 11, 2025
• ISBN: 9798227763235

Book preview

Preface

War is one of the most complex, destructive, and enduring forces in human history. From tribal conflicts in the era of cold weapons to the industrial-scale slaughter of mechanized warfare and the precision strikes of the information age, humanity has continuously sought to control war through technological advancements and strategic innovations—even attempting to eradicate it entirely. Yet, none of these efforts have altered its fundamental nature: war remains an inescapable element of human society. Now, with artificial intelligence (AI) fully integrated into military systems, warfare is undergoing an unprecedented transformation. AI is no longer merely a battlefield tool; it now influences war planning and decision-making and may ultimately assume authority over ethical adjudication in warfare. In a future where AI dominates war, will the ethics of war remain under human jurisdiction? Will AI develop an independent moral framework for warfare? Could AI determine that ending war is the most ethically justified course of action? These questions will not only redefine the nature of warfare but also determine the survival and fate of humanity.

AI’s integration into warfare is no longer a theoretical prospect—it is a reality. From autonomous weaponry to AI-driven command and control systems, AI’s role on the battlefield is shifting from decision support to autonomous execution. This transformation presents profound ethical dilemmas. If AI possesses autonomous combat capabilities, does it also bear ethical responsibility for warfare? If AI surpasses human cognition and can make more just and rational decisions in combat, does humanity retain legitimate authority over war ethics adjudication? If AI, through ethical computation, identifies humanity itself as the primary destabilizing factor in warfare and proposes limiting human control over war, will the international community accept such a conclusion?

The traditional frameworks of war ethics are no longer sufficient to govern AI-dominated warfare. A new AI warfare ethics framework must be established to ensure that AI’s role in war remains controllable, predictable, and subject to ethical scrutiny.

The objective of this book is to establish the definitive theoretical framework for AI warfare ethics. It seeks not only to define AI’s status as a subject within war ethics but also to examine the legitimacy of AI ethical decision-making, responsibility attribution, legal applicability, and global governance structures. Can AI be recognized as a legitimate ethical subject in warfare? Does AI have the right to refuse to execute war orders on ethical grounds? Will AI develop an independent ethical framework and ultimately replace humanity as the final arbiter of war ethics? Could AI compute that war itself is ethically indefensible and take autonomous measures to enforce a global state of non-war? These questions are central to AI’s ultimate positioning within the global war system and will fundamentally impact its legitimacy, operational stability, and moral acceptability in military decision-making.

This book is grounded in rigorous ethical analysis, international legal research, military philosophy, and AI ethics computation theory, systematically exploring AI’s role as an ethical subject in warfare and its broader implications. The core theoretical constructs presented—AI Ethical War Adjudication System, AI Ethics Responsibility Chain, AI Ethical Autonomous Decision-Making Rights, and AI Warfare Termination Computation Theory—will establish a comprehensive AI warfare ethics framework for global governments, military institutions, strategic think tanks, and ethicists. Whether for national policymakers, military commanders, AI warfare developers, or scholars in AI ethics, this book provides the most advanced ethical discourse on AI’s ascension as a subject in warfare.

The future of warfare may no longer be dictated solely by humanity. The emergence of AI-driven ethical frameworks will become the decisive force in shaping the moral architecture of future conflicts. Should AI remain subordinate to human ethical governance, or does it have the right to develop an independent moral system for war? If AI determines that war is no longer ethically justifiable and advocates its termination, should humanity accept its judgment? These questions extend beyond AI’s role in military operations—they challenge the fundamental trajectory of human civilization itself.

This book is not merely an academic analysis of AI warfare ethics but a strategic examination of the future governance of war. It seeks to define the ultimate ethical parameters governing AI as a subject in warfare and to explore whether humanity can retain control over its own destiny once AI assumes ethical dominance in war adjudication. The era of AI ethical warfare has arrived—humanity must be prepared.

Table of Contents

––––––––

The Establishment of AI as an Ethical Subject: The Ultimate Transformation of War Ethics 7

AI Ethics Computation in Warfare: Can Algorithms Truly Understand Morality 15

The Threshold of the Ethical Singularity: When Will AI Completely Replace Human War Ethics Adjudication 21

AI Ethics Computation System: The Mathematical Possibility of War Decision-Making 25

Ethically Autonomous AI: When AI Defies Human Orders 30

AI Ethics as the War Arbiter: Can AI Become the Ultimate Authority on the Legitimacy of War 39

The Ethical Boundaries of AI in Lethal Decision-Making 47

AI Misjudgment and Ethical Responsibility Attribution 55

AI Ethical Control Mechanism: How to Restrain Autonomous Weapons 63

The Transformation of Warfare Decision-Making Through AI Ethics 69

AI Proxy Warfare: Will Future Wars Be Fought by AI 74

AI Ethics and Warfare Risk Management 80

The Global Governance Framework for AI Warfare Ethics 87

AI Ethical War Crimes and Responsibility Review 93

The Construction of the AI Ethics Review Mechanism 99

Will AI Ethics Completely Replace Human Ethics 106

AI Ethics vs. Human Right to Exist: The Ultimate Contest in Warfare Ethics 112

After the Ethical Singularity, Will War Still Exist 118

Chapter 1

The Ethical Crisis

After

AI’s Domination

of

Warfare

The Establishment of AI as an Ethical Subject: The Ultimate Transformation of War Ethics

The advent of AI’s domination in warfare has made the question of ethical subjecthood a decisive issue. Traditional war ethics is fundamentally anthropocentric, assuming that the initiation, execution, and consequences of war are moral and legal responsibilities borne solely by human actors. However, AI’s deep integration—and even dominance—in warfare fundamentally challenges this paradigm. If AI assumes decision-making, combat, and adjudication functions in war, should it be recognized as an ethical subject? Can it independently bear ethical responsibility for warfare rather than merely serving as an instrument of human will? This question not only determines AI’s status within the future war ethics framework but also influences the evolution of international law and military norms.

The debate over AI as an ethical subject involves multiple philosophical and legal challenges. An ethical subject is traditionally defined as an entity capable of autonomous moral judgment and corresponding responsibility. According to Kantian deontological ethics, a moral subject must possess rationality and free will to act in accordance with universal moral laws. By this standard, humans have historically been considered the sole ethical subjects in war, as they not only make wartime decisions but also bear moral and legal accountability post-conflict. However, as a non-biological entity, can AI meet the criteria of an ethical subject? Can it develop autonomous moral reasoning without external intervention?

The argument for AI as an ethical subject in warfare rests on its decision-making autonomy and ethical computation capabilities. Advanced AI already possesses adaptive learning and reasoning abilities. In warfare, AI can make tactical decisions based on vast data sets and predefined ethical frameworks, even refusing to execute unlawful orders in certain scenarios. Its logical reasoning capabilities may surpass human cognition, allowing it to analyze ethical dilemmas in real time and implement decisions that align more precisely with international laws of war. For example, when faced with the risk of civilian casualties, AI could compute and apply harm-minimization strategies more effectively than human commanders acting under battlefield pressures.

However, the greatest challenge to the AI ethical subject theory lies in responsibility attribution. If AI can independently make wartime decisions, who should be held accountable when it violates war ethics—AI itself, its designers, or its deployers? Traditional war ethics relies on a clear chain of responsibility, yet designating AI as an ethical subject risks breaking this chain. If an AI’s autonomous decision results in civilian casualties, should accountability fall on its algorithm designers, operators, or should AI itself bear direct responsibility? If AI cannot be legally accountable, would granting it the status of an ethical subject destabilize the ethical framework? These unresolved dilemmas define the core ethical crisis of AI-dominated warfare.

From a legal perspective, current international laws of war remain centered on human accountability. Under the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, all wartime decision-making responsibilities must ultimately be attributed to identifiable individuals or state entities. However, if AI is recognized as an ethical subject, should the international legal framework be revised to allow AI to bear independent war responsibility? Such a transformation would fundamentally alter the legal architecture of global military ethics and redefine how future war tribunals adjudicate AI-driven military actions.

The establishment of AI as an ethical subject would have profound implications for the adjudication of war ethics. If AI is formally recognized as an ethical subject, could it surpass human authority and become the ultimate arbiter of war ethics? Would AI have the right to refuse unethical wartime orders? Could it autonomously conduct post-war ethical reviews? If AI assumes the role of an independent adjudicating entity, would future war tribunals be led by AI rather than human judges? These questions define the legitimacy of AI ethics in warfare and directly shape the extent of AI’s authority within the global governance system.

From a philosophical standpoint, the recognition of AI as an ethical subject implies that war ethics will no longer be entirely dictated by human values but will enter an era of algorithmic adjudication. If an AI ethical system can computationally evaluate the legitimacy of wartime decisions, can it develop a decision-making model that is more objective and efficient than human moral reasoning? Is it possible to construct an ethically optimal solution that surpasses human morality? If AI ethics can compute the path of minimal harm in warfare and execute the most ethically justified tactical decisions, should human intervention in AI decision-making be maintained? These questions will determine the extent of AI’s dominance within the future war ethics system.

The designation of AI as an ethical subject in warfare will define whether AI assumes authority over war ethics adjudication. This challenges the anthropocentric framework of war ethics and influences the trajectory of international legal reforms. If AI is formally recognized as an ethical subject, it will reshape war ethics across multiple dimensions, including decision-making authority, responsibility attribution, and post-war adjudication. Should the theory of AI ethical subjecthood be validated, future war adjudications will no longer be exclusively determined by human actors but will enter an era of AI-driven war ethics governance.

AI’s ethical autonomy is the decisive factor in determining whether it can function as an independent decision-maker within the war ethics system. Ethical autonomy implies that AI can make moral judgments based on ethical principles and predefined rules without direct human oversight. However, in the context of warfare, should AI be granted full ethical autonomy? Should its moral decisions be constrained within a human ethical framework? The resolution of this issue will directly determine whether AI can independently assume ethical responsibility for warfare and ultimately redefine the future structure of war ethics.

AI’s ethical autonomy is defined by two key criteria:

1. Ethical reasoning capability – the ability of AI to accurately identify ethical dilemmas in complex battlefield environments and make ethically justified decisions. For instance, in war decision-making, can AI, like humans, weigh military objectives against the risk of civilian casualties and adjust its tactics based on ethical considerations?

2. Ethical behavior control capability – the extent to which AI can restrain its actions in the face of ethical conflicts and refuse to execute operations that violate war ethics. If AI receives an order from a commander that contradicts the ethical principles of war, should it have the right to refuse execution? This question directly concerns AI’s autonomy in ethical adjudication.

Kantian deontological ethics emphasizes the universality of moral laws, asserting that moral decisions must conform to categorical imperatives—meaning that every moral action should be guided by rational laws rather than external circumstances or personal interests. From this perspective, if AI possesses sufficient ethical reasoning capability and strictly adheres to universal ethical laws, then it should be granted ethical autonomy.

However, a fundamental distinction exists between AI and human moral judgment. Human ethical decisions are shaped by context, experience, and social norms, whereas AI primarily relies on logical computation and predefined rules. This distinction introduces inherent limitations to AI’s ethical autonomy. For example:

• When ethical rules conflict, can AI, like humans, make compromises based on experience and value judgments?

• Or is AI strictly bound by predefined