China’s military has issued a clear warning against relying solely on artificial intelligence in warfare, emphasizing the irreplaceable role of human decision-making. In an article published in People’s Liberation Army Daily on New Year’s Eve, the military highlighted the limitations of AI, which, despite its utility, lacks self-awareness and the capacity for accountability.
The article advocates for a balanced approach where AI supports human commanders rather than replacing them. AI’s strengths in data analysis, simulations, and planning can optimize command effectiveness, but human judgment must guide its use to ensure adaptability and creativity in dynamic situations.
Human-Centric Command Structures
The PLA proposes a model of “humans plan and AI executes,” maintaining human oversight at every critical juncture. In this structure, machines analyze data, suggest actions, and perform routine tasks, while human commanders make the final decisions. This ensures that errors stemming from AI’s opaque, algorithm-driven processes, often referred to as its “black-box nature,” are mitigated.
The article points out AI’s inability to reflect on or refine its actions independently, a critical shortfall in battlefield scenarios. Human commanders, conversely, can adapt strategies, exploit enemy weaknesses, and take responsibility for their decisions. Even advanced systems, such as autonomous missile defenses, continue to rely on human operators for ultimate accountability.
Strategic Control Over AI
China has consistently called for global regulation of military AI, advocating for “human control over technology.” President Xi Jinping reiterated this stance during a recent meeting with U.S. counterpart Joe Biden in Peru, where both leaders agreed that decisions involving nuclear weapons must remain under human control.
The Pentagon’s latest annual report on China’s military highlights the PLA’s ongoing efforts to integrate AI into its operations. By 2030, the PLA aims to achieve “algorithmic” and “network-centric” warfare capabilities. Significant investments have been made in technologies like autonomous vehicles, predictive maintenance, and automated target recognition. Civilian AI innovations, including drones and image recognition, are also being explored for military applications.
U.S. Concerns and AI Development
The United States military is similarly advancing its AI capabilities, with recent initiatives to integrate the technology into combat operations. Radha Plumb, the Pentagon’s chief digital and AI officer, described the effort as the “first major deployment of leading-edge AI” to meet real-time battlefield demands. Plumb also warned of accelerated AI advancements by U.S. adversaries such as China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, framing them as significant national security risks.
While both nations push forward with AI-driven military advancements, China’s explicit call for human oversight underlines the global debate over the ethical and strategic use of artificial intelligence in warfare.
Author’s Opinion
The PLA’s stance highlights a broader ethical and strategic debate: should AI ever have the final say in matters of life and death? While the benefits of AI in augmenting decision-making are undeniable, its lack of accountability and adaptability raises crucial concerns. By emphasizing human oversight, China underscores a fundamental truth—technology, no matter how advanced, must remain a tool, not a replacement for human judgment. This approach not only safeguards ethical decision-making but also reflects a cautious acknowledgment of AI’s potential risks on the battlefield.
