Artificial
Intelligence and emerging technologies invaded warfare since its early start.
The use of artificial intelligence in armed conflict and in decision making on
the battlefield raises alarming questions on its humanitarian consequences and
the adherence to the basic international legal principles.
The use of
artificial intelligence in the current war on Gaza concerns experts with reports
indicating that "untested” and "undisclosed” technology is being employed.
In the
following report, we delve into the dilemma of the use of artificial
intelligence by Israel in the current war on Gaza, how the use of such
technology facilitated the ongoing genocide, and the legal liability of
corporations in enabling the means for international crimes.
Warfare
Technology: the Gospel, Lavender, and Where's Daddy?
The reliance
on AI and automation in warfare is not a factor of today. Israel claims that
its first AI war was the 11-day war of May 2021 on Gaza.
Since the
Israeli military launched its large-scale war on the Gaza strip in October 2023,
attributes of use of artificial intelligence and the advance use of technology
has been clear.
The use of
AI systems in the current warfare has accelerated the speed and scale of
targeting of supposedly "Gazan military leadership and premises”. Means of
artificial intelligence allowed faster tracking of targets and damage
estimation while presenting a major breach to basic IHL principles as a form of
a dumb- mass assassination machine.
Recognized
AI systems by Israel includes the Gospel, Lavendar, and Where’s Daddy.
The
Gospel
The Gospel
or "Habsora” in Hebrew, is an AI system that uses machine learning to interpret
vast amounts of data and generate potential targets for military actions by the
IDF.
Reports
point out the terrifying fact that the Gospel unit focus is concentrated on the
quantitate scale of targets compared to the qualitative aspect. It was in fact
described by a former intelligence officer as a "mass assassination factory.”
The
investigation by +972 confirmed from five different sources that the number of
civilians that are likely to be killed in attacks on private residences is
known in advance to Israeli intelligence under the category of "collateral
damage.”
Lavendar
The Lavendar
system is designed to mark suspected operatives in Hamas and Palestinian
Islamic Jihad (PIJ). In the first few weeks of the war the machine identified
around 37,000 Palestinians, and their homes, as "suspects", which
could be targeted in air strikes even if family members were at home.
According to
the investigation carried out by +972 Magazine and Local Call, intelligence
officers pointed out that "Lavender has played a key role in the unprecedented
bombing,” explaining the massive civilian death toll.
Reports
indicate that during the early stages of the war, the IDF gave sweeping
approval for officers to adopt Lavender’s kill lists, without requiring to
thoroughly check the reason behind these choices or to examine the raw
intelligence data on which they were based. One source stated that human
personnel often served only as a "rubber stamp” for the machine’s decisions,
adding that, normally, they would personally devote only about "20 seconds” to
each target before authorizing a bombing — just to make sure the
Lavender-marked target is a male. This is the case even though the system
"errors” count to approximately 10 percent of generated cases and that is
evident that it occasionally marks individuals who have merely a loose
connection to militant groups, or no connection at all.
Where’s
Daddy?
This
automated system is used specifically to track the targeted individuals and
carry out bombings when they have entered their family’s residences.
Sources
indicated that each time the pace of assassinations waned, more targets were
added to systems like Where’s Daddy? to locate individuals that entered their
homes and could therefore be bombed. The decision of who to put into the
tracking systems could be made by relatively low-ranking officers in the
military hierarchy.
How do
these systems work?
Targets are
created using a "probabilistic interference” method of machine learning
algorithms. The liability of the generated output depends on the quality and
scale of the input data it processes. These systems look for patterns to
generate predictions and suggestions on the likelihood of events or identifying
status.
The error
lies in the blind method itself. A civilian is easily mistaken for a combatant
based on likelihood and similar characteristics.
Another
system known as the "Fire Factory” is being deployed to organize and schedule
raids and attacks on military approved targets.
Minimal due
diligence in avoiding civilian casualties and damage to civilian structures,
combined with the will to cause severe damage, transformed the Gaza strip into
a massive graveyard.
The
deployment of sophisticated artificial intelligence systems and automation
counts for the massive death toll amongst civilians and civilian targets in the
Gaza Strip.
The Target
Administration Division formed in 2019 indicated clearly on its website that it
uses the AI system Gospel to speed up the pace of target determination process.
The overall
mass targeting, simultaneously, and within a short timeframe serves in deepening
the shock effect between civilians to generate pressure on armed resistance
groups in Gaza.
The
proportionality principle in article 30 in the Geneva conventions is set to
question. Israel claims that it is respecting this principle, but this depends
again on the vague and general definition that proportionality has in
international law and within international practice.
The emergence
of numerous targets that these advancements make possible renders human
oversight almost impossible.
The use of
such technology handles the life-or-death actions to inhumane machines. The
amount of data and information that AI systems analyze at a tremendous speed, manually
required thousands of hours and hundreds of humans to analyze.
This takes
us back to the original dilemma, Gaza is under Israeli occupation, and Israel
has access and controls the flow of information across and beyond the Gaza
Strip. Israel controls its airspace, electromagnetic space, communications, and
its full territorial borders even if until the start of the military land
invasion it had no military presence inside to the land of Gaza.
The
unhindered access to data and information by Israel makes the Gaza Strip fully
"exposed” and potentially accessible for automated target screening.
The Project Nimbus
The Project
Nimbus is a 1.2 bn joint contract between Google, Amazon and the Israeli government.
The deal signed in 2021 provides the Israeli government and its military with
cloud computing infrastructure, artificial intelligence, and other
technological services.
A report by
the Intercept in 2021, highlighted that Google is offering advanced AI
capabilities to Israel. This is used to enable Israel to harvest data for
facial recognition, video analysis, sentiment analysis, and object tracking as
part of the Project Nimbus.
A report by
Brown University Professor, Roberto J Gondalez, marked the involvement of other
tech companies with Israel including the US public company Palantir
Technologies.
Google
employees have been organizing protests and sit-ins led by No Tech for
Apartheid against Project Nimbus since 2021.
With the
disturbing reports of the reliance on AI in the current war on Gaza and the
genocide charge for its war in the ICJ, the opposition of Google employees have
re-escalated.
AI as a
tool of genocide
Artificial
intelligence unleashed new military action scopes, and the evidence is clear in
the current war on Gaza.
By the time
of drafting this report the death toll in Gaza has exceeded 37,000. The head of the
UN's Mine Action Program, Mungo Birch, has indicated that the number of
unexploded missiles and bombs lying under the rubble was
"unprecedented" since World War II and that Gaza was now the site of
about 37 million tons of rubble — more than what had been generated across all
of Ukraine during Russia's war — and 800,000 tons of asbestos and other
contaminants.
A report by the Wall Street Journal estimated that on
average, Israel hit every square kilometer of Gaza with 79 bombs, munitions or
shells.
The scale
and scope of operations and the intensity of the military operation is
alarming.
The UNOCHA
estimated the death rate in Gaza exceeding 250 people per day, given the number
of civilian deaths as of January.
Legal
Liability of Corporations in enabling the means for international crimes
Corporations-
as legal persons- should be accountable for committing grave violations including
the crime of genocide.
The role of
corporations in genocide is established from the criminal liability as enablers
for criminal conduct. Indeed, corporations could be convicted as active
participants in human rights violations and war crimes if proven to have engaged
in direct combat.
The liability
of corporation on actions constituting acts of genocide under international law
is derived from the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Convention
on the Crime of Genocide of 1948.Although a ray of scholars argues whether corporations are subject to
the Crime of Genocide, we refer to Article 4 of the convention, "Persons
committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be
punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public
officials or private individuals.”
The term
"persons” is legally defined during the period of drafting this convention in reference
to both natural and moral/artificial persons, which includes corporations as a
general rule.[1]
The
liability of corporations presumes a standard of knowledge. With the absence of
command responsibility in a corporate set-up, the awareness of the criminal
attributes and purposes of manufactured and retailed products is essential to
determine criminal responsibility of corporations or corporate accountability.
Although
corporations are subject to the provisions of international law and
specifically the concerned convention, the challenge for persecutors remain in
proving the specific intent to commit genocide. Participation in the genocide
can constitute complicity by knowingly aiding and procuring means that
contribute to international crimes.
Despite the
severity of the crime of genocide and the substantial responsibility corporate
actors might have in facilitating and enabling its commitment, by the time of
writing this report, there is no tangible way for companies to be investigated
for genocide by an international tribunal.
Genocide as
an international crime is prosecutable before the ICC and special tribunals
including the ICTY, the ECCC, and the ICTR. However, the statutes of these
courts do not imbody them with the jurisdiction to prosecute legal persons.
Although the
situation might be in the lack of international criminal jurisdiction to
prosecute corporate entities, this shall not free companies from their legal
obligations.
The initial
draft of the Rome Statute tended to include "legal persons, with the exception
of states” but did not make it to the final statute.
On the other
hand, the ICJ has no jurisdiction over criminal cases and cannot prosecute
actors except states.
Available
tribunal measures could be realized in the domestic prosecution only.
Both the
Gospel and Lavendar were developed by the IDF signals intelligence branch known
as "Unit 8200”.
Other
outsourced technology could be subject to liability. Heavy deals like Project
Nimbus raise alarms on the criminal liability of huge corporations like Google
and Amazon.
Accessible
Means of Support
In the
absence of concise and accessible international judicial tracks to hold
corporations accountable for facilitating the means and enabling genocide, the
reliance on other means of advocacy becomes necessary.
Although addressing
corporate liability through competent tribunals is not available, the resort
could be to advocacy efforts that pressure corporations and influences their
policy and economic behavior.
Internal
employees' revolt movements that influence leadership decisions, push for
dropping concerning contracts, and call for divestments are essential. Staff
awareness and collective action against deals that hold substantial human
rights concerns provides reasonable grounds for corporate management to
reconsider contracts and withdraw investments. Employees' dissatisfaction and
unproductive environments tend to generate more monetary and strategic losses for
corporations than any promised profits these deals might generate.
External
organized advocacy that calls for divestments, boycotting products, and impeding
the public image of these private actors also promises considerable impact.
As far as
corporations are left unbothered, and in the absence of measurable legal
interventions, nothing could withhold private actors from involving in
relationships that constitute grounds for grave human rights violations.
United
efforts that shed light on the establishing factors for crimes and the
involvement of corporate entities in their material element is the founding
point to end this participation.
Other
measures could be established though collective national lobby campaigns and
pressure on national governments to work on adopting adequate international
legal provisions, establishing national corporate liability for enabling
genocide, setting sanctions, and prosecuting corporations in front of its national
courts.
Outcomes
Huge tech
companies, although not directly engaging in the actual criminal act, play a
significant role as enablers for the commitment of such crimes.
Corporate
liability is intensified in the case of clear criminal intent. Willingly
providing systems and software for a legally recognized apartheid state that is
questioned for severe crimes, while knowingly recognizing the disturbing use of
such technology in warfare is enough to address corporate liability.
Holding
corporations accountable for international crimes should not be a matter of
debate. The real obstacle remains in how the absence of active judicial
measures diminishes the sense of corporate responsibility.
Not engaging
in severe international crimes, should not rely only on companies fear for
preserving their public image, but rather on strict legal attributes.
Recommendations
We, at the Palestinian Association for
Human Rights (Witness), condemn the unlawful killing of civilians and the
destruction of the means of life in Gaza. In this regard, we warn of the
devastating impacts of the use of automation and artificial intelligence in
warfare.
We stand firm against the active and
passive participation in the active genocide imposed on the people of Gaza, and
we condemn all actions that enable the massive destruction of civilian lives
and civilian populations whether by states or non-state entities.
With that being said, we call all
concerned corporations and private actors to withhold their contributions and
supply of technology and services to the Israeli government that are deployed and
used as mass killing machines. Divestments are necessary to ensure the genocide
is not moving any further, and so is the end to the military and intelligence
supply; to ensure compliance with the basic human rights and international
humanitarian law principles.
26 June 2024
The Palestinian Association for Human
Rights (Witness)
[1] In
the period of drafting the Genocide convention 1946-1948, and in the absence of
a contradicting text, the definition of "persons” -in principle- recognizes
natural persons in addition to artificial persons including corporations as
subjects of international law .