This study examines how the use of decision-support military Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems can affect the democratic conduct of warfare. AI can challenge the democratic conduct of warfare by introducing systemic risks such as reduced oversight, opacity, and automation bias. The inquiry focuses on two case studies: US Project Maven and Israeli AI targeting systems. Available reporting and official statements portray the United States as emphasizing procedural oversight, containing AI risks, while investigative reporting on Israel alleges prioritization of speed, looser scrutiny and higher tolerated error. The accounts reviewed suggest that democracies are not exempt from risks of democratic erosion in war when adopting AI. Yet, the divergence in practices hints that AI does not autonomously drive erosion; rather, it amplifies contextual pressures such as conflict intensity, institutional culture, and threat perception. The conclusion underlines the necessity for regulatory and procedural frameworks for better aligning AI use with legal and ethical norms. This research contributes to deepening the understanding of the risks posed by AI in military operations with a novel, case-based analysis, aiming to inform policy discussions on the responsible deployment of AI systems in contemporary and future conflicts.
The special issue “CTRL + Power: The Politics of Digital Authoritarianism” of Global Policy is published in open access with the financial support of Fondazione Compagnia di San Paolo. The issue is part of the initiative “CTRL + power: the (geo)politics of digital authoritarianism”, an academic collaboration between T.wai, LSE IDEAS and the University of Torino.
