"AI creates better opportunities for systems to make correct decisions, but it is important to emphasize that decision-making cannot be transferred to robots, it is basically always done by a human being," writes Saab's press secretary Mattias Rà ¥dstrà ¶m in an email.
When the Swedish Commander-in-Chief (Ã-B) Micael Byde'n spoke about unmanned systems and artificial intelligence at the conference People and Defense in January, one could sense the power behind the words, despite the corona-safe digital distance.
"We must stay at the forefront," said Micael Byde'n.
But we will not know more about the development that the Armed Forces is facing either. Oxygen is first promised an interview with the head of research. But after the questions have been sent in advance, the offer is withdrawn.
The Liberals' defense policy spokesman Allan Widman does not make the wave after Ã-B's speech. He believes that investments in autonomous weapons are in the interest of industry rather than defense. He has no major moral concerns about the development of autonomous weapons -- but he warns of the costs that could displace the new soldiers, tanks and cannons he wants to see.
"We must understand that no matter how much we invest in research and innovation, we will never be able to compete with countries around the United States, China and Russia," he says.
Allan Widman believes that an excessive technological craze has characterized the Swedish defense in recent decades. He sees the upgrade of the Jas Gripen aircraft as an illustrative example.
"You have to redo everything. It will be a new engine, new hull and new sensors. These are huge leaps that often lead to delays and thus more expensive ones. The industry with its thousands of engineers is naturally happy to see investments in technology development, but I am more interested in having an army of a decent size," says Allan Widman.
The industry is pushing onIn Hawaii, Ann Wright sits and discusses what drives the development towards autonomous weapons: Industry, rather than the military, she also believes. She perceives a skepticism within the military against letting go of control and letting the computers order themselves.
"There will no longer be use for all these generals when computer number one is a four-star general and computer number two a three-star general," she says, only half jokingly.
International ban on weaponsProhibition of biological and toxin weapons (spread of diseases)
Entry into force: 1975
Number of countries: 173
Sweden with: YES
Entry into force: 1997
Number of countries: 164
Sweden with: YES
Entry into force: 1997
Number of countries: 192
Sweden with: YES
(prohibits, inter alia, firearms such as napalm
and permanently blinded laser weapons)
Entry into force: 1983
Number of countries: 125
Sweden with: YES
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).