Manuel Enrique Noacco Rosende

manuelenrique.noaccorosende@sciencespo-lille.eu

Policy Brief
1. Introduction
In this policy brief, I set off to tackle two interconnected issues related to the impact
of emerging technologies, and particularly autonomous weapons, on international relations
and global security. I will, on the one hand, analyse how emerging technologies have become
a central element of contemporary international security concerns, particularly around proxy
conflicts in regions marked by geopolitical rivalries. I will further delve into the role of
international norms and treaties in regulating the development and use of autonomous
weapons and AI in warfare. These topics are critical in the twenty-first century, as they carry
significant implications for global stability and security.
In order to focus on the impact emerging technologies have on proxy conflicts, I will
consider the latter around a typology of five models of proxy conflicts: exploitative, cultural,
coercive, contractual or transactional (Fox, 2021). For the sake of shortness and relevance of
the policy brief, I will focus on two of these types and how they relate to modern conflicts:
the cultural proxy and the current conflict in the Middle East, and the contractual proxy and
the war on Ukraine. Afterwards, I will focus on current legislation and efforts being made to
control the proliferation of new technologies in warfare and suggest some policy
recommendations. The policy brief will we structured in five parts: this introduction (1), a
section on the background and context to deal with (2), a section analysing these challenges
(3), a section for the policy recommendations (4), and finally a conclusion (5).

2. Background and Context

2.1 Emerging Technologies in Modern Warfare
Emerging technologies encompass a wide array of advancements, including but not
limited to cyber capabilities, uninhabited aerial vehicles (UAVs), artificial intelligence (AI),
advanced surveillance systems, and autonomous weapons. These innovations have not yet
reshaped the landscape of modern warfare, but could potentially provide state and non-state
actors with asymmetric advantages and alter traditional power dynamics.
Cyber capabilities, for instance, enable actors to conduct covert operations, disrupt
infrastructure, and influence public opinion without the need for direct military engagement.
However, evidence suggests these strategies are not prone to escalate conflicts but rather to
de-escalate them (Valeriano & Jensen, 2021).Furthermore, UAVs, commonly known as
drones, offer precision targeting capabilities and reconnaissance abilities, reducing the
political risks associated with missions that put soldiers directly at risk. Similarly, AI-driven
systems enhance decision-making processes, optimize logistics, and can automate various
aspects of military operations, potentially making them more effective and reducing human
intervention. This is one of the main effects of emerging technologies in war, and the one
most have in common: their potential to reduce accountability (Horowitz, 2020).

2.2 Proxy Conflicts

“Proxy conflicts” truly encompasses a wide set of international conflicts typical of the
modern day but historically present for a long time. In this policy brief, following Fox’s
typology and studies, we will consider proxy relations as those presented as a principal-actor
dynamic between two parties who join forces --or generally collaborate-- against a certain
 Manuel Enrique Noacco Rosende
manuelenrique.noaccorosende@sciencespo-lille.eu

enemy. According to the author’s typology, I will focus on two models of proxy relations: the
cultural and the contractual. Fox defines the former as a principal-actor relation based on a
common culture and objective. The latter, instead, is defined as an economical principal-actor
relation where the proxy assess and accepts the risks before acceding to the contract (2021).
On the present analysis, I argue the relationship of the United States and Israel is that
of a cultural proxy, as they share the western culture and values and have a tight diplomatic
bond and are united in their objective of disseminating and defending these values in the
Middle East. This could be considered an explanation of the USA’s military and economic
support in Israel’s ongoing conflict and geopolitical rivalry with Iran. Regarding the Russian-
Ukrainian conflict and ongoing war, the existing proxy relation is a contractual one between
the Kremlin and the Wagner Group.

2.3 Current Regulations on Weapons

The development and deployment of emerging technologies in warfare pose complex
regulatory challenges. There is nonetheless already a basis in place: international
humanitarian law (IHL), which encompasses treaties such as the Geneva Conventions and
customary norms, providing a framework for regulating armed conflict. However, the rapid
pace of technological advancement has outpaced regulatory efforts. New regulations tend to
focus on protection of civilians or specific weapons, and are usually encouraged by groups
that are not the states in possession of the armament and know how to use it (Nasu &
McLaughlin, 2014). Moreover, interpretations of IHL principles, such as distinction,
proportionality, and precaution, remain subject to debate, specially in the context of
autonomous weapons. Consequently, regulatory gaps exist concerning the elaboration and
use of new technologies in warfare.

3. Analysis of the Challenge

3.1 Impact of Emerging Technologies on Proxy Conflicts
Emerging technologies have not quite revolutionized warfare, but they have a
significant potential impact on proxy conflicts. One of the main concerns is that of how the
proliferation of these new weapons means they will eventually reach the hands of terrorists
and non-state actors, and how this could difficult retaliation. The impact of these technologies
vary vastly on each instance. Cyber capabilities, for instance, enable state and non-state
actors to conduct influence operations, sabotage critical infrastructure, and disrupt
communications networks. Such is exactly the use the Russian government exercise of these
in it’s war with Ukraine, but this is a role scholars deem supportive rather than decisive
(Mueller et al., 2023). These activities can undermine the stability of targeted states and
exacerbate existing tensions between rival factions, but normally do not take to escalation
(Valeriano & Jensen, 2021).
Contrarily, the proliferation of UAVs has transformed the conduct of proxy conflicts
by enabling precision strikes, intelligence gathering, and aerial surveillance. Non-state actors,
such as insurgent groups and terrorist organizations, have acquired UAVs to challenge the
military superiority of conventional forces and extend their reach beyond traditional
boundaries (Horowitz, 2020). However, evidence suggests that the use of drones do not have
an escalatory effect: it did not have it in the shooting of drones between Iran and the USA
 Manuel Enrique Noacco Rosende
manuelenrique.noaccorosende@sciencespo-lille.eu

(Horowitz, 2016), nor during the Russo-Ukrainian war (Mueller et al., 2023), nor so far in the
large drone shootout between Israel and Iran (Regencia & Pietromarchi, 2024).
Furthermore, AI-driven systems offer unprecedented opportunities for information
warfare, predictive analytics, and autonomous decision-making in proxy conflicts. State and
non-state actors leverage AI algorithms to analyze vast amounts of data, identify patterns, and
optimize military operations. However, the most complex the technology gets, the less
accessible it becomes for poorer countries and non-state actors like terrorist groups
(Horowitz, 2021). On the same note, there is an ongoing discussion about the impact or
potential impact of autonomous weapons, and how allowing machines to pull the trigger
could lead to civilian casualties or be more vulnerable to cyber attacks (Asaro, 2020). In
summary, the opacity of AI algorithms & autonomous weapons, and the potential for
unintended consequences raise concerns about the accountability and legality of AI-driven
actions in conflict zones.
On the specific case of the Russo-Ukrainian war, emerging technologies might have
had an escalating effect, but not because of the technologies themselves being used. In the
Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament, Favaro & Williams argue these technologies
gave Russia a false perception of their military capabilities that resulted in the
decisionmakers escalating the conflict (2023).

3.2 Role of Geopolitical Rivalries

Geopolitical rivalries exacerbate proxy conflicts by fueling competition for influence,
resources, and strategic dominance in contested regions. Major powers, seeking to maintain
or expand their spheres of influence, often provide support to proxy actors aligned with their
interests, thereby prolonging conflicts and destabilizing affected regions. The Middle East,
for example, serves as a battleground for competing interests between the United States,
Russia, Iran, Israel, and other regional allies. However, not all these principal-actor
relationships work on the same way, and this also has an impact on how emerging
technologies play a role in these contexts. For instance, I argue that geopolitical rivalries
around countries where at least one is a cultural proxy contribute to the proliferation of
emerging technologies as the principal will more likely support militarily and economically
the actor, as is the case between the USA and Israel. On the other hand, where proxy relations
in the conflict are less strong and more contextually or economically explained, emerging
technologies might result in unexpected outcomes that complicate the situation, but principals
with fuller capabilities will be more reluctant to share their technologies and weapons. It is
important to remember that some of these, like the use of advanced drones, require vast
structure and access to information to a point where even rich countries like the UK and
Germany cannot afford to use them in a proxy conflict (Horowitz, 2021). Furthermore,
competing powers seeking to gain technological superiority and undermine adversaries'
capabilities might result in an arms race of emerging technologies. Arms transfers, military
assistance, and technological investments by external actors exacerbate arms races and
escalate conflicts, perpetuating cycles of violence and instability in conflicts that would
otherwise lack the resources to sustain advanced warfare.

3.3 Ethical and Strategic Implications

 Manuel Enrique Noacco Rosende
manuelenrique.noaccorosende@sciencespo-lille.eu

The development and use of emerging technologies in proxy conflicts raise profound
ethical and strategic implications for international security. From an ethical standpoint, the
indiscriminate targeting of civilian populations, the erosion of human control over lethal
decision-making, and the normalization of violence through remote warfare challenge
fundamental principles of humanity and dignity enshrined in IHL. Strategically, the
proliferation of emerging technologies needs to be further studied in order to understand
whether it enables the likelihood of unintended escalation or not, but generally there is a
serious risk of AI producing miscalculations in proxy conflicts that could end with civilian
casualties or the conflict going in unexpected directions. Moreover, the possibility of
allowing autonomous systems to act lethally without significant human intervention could
lead to a loss of responsibility that would difficult regulating the technologies in a meaningful
way in the future, and could also lead to unexpected events as we do not fully understand the
reasoning AI systems might use to choose targets (Asaro, 2020).

4. Policy Recommendations
4.1 Enhancing Diplomatic Engagement
Diplomatic efforts should prioritize de-escalation and conflict resolution in regions
affected by proxy conflicts and geopolitical rivalries by attempting to discuss the situation
with the parts involved before escalating the conflict (Favaro & Williams, 2023). Multilateral
forums, such as the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and regional organizations,
offer platforms for dialogue, mediation, and confidence-building measures among involved
parties. High-level diplomatic initiatives, backed by regional stakeholders and international
mediators, can facilitate ceasefire agreements, humanitarian access, and political negotiations
to address root causes of conflict: at the end of the day, warfare continuous to work in the
same way as before these emerging technologies became widely implemented.

4.2 Strengthening Normative Frameworks

International norms and treaties should be strengthened to regulate the development
and use of emerging technologies in warfare. Some authors go to the point of soliciting the
banning of some of these technologies, particularly that of autonomous weapons (Asaro,
2012). Others highlight the low impact they had on escalation, as is the case with drones and
cyber capabilities (Mueller et al., 2023; Valeriano & Jensen, 2021). However, I mainly line
with the belief that international regulation could provide a safe framework for the innovation
on these technologies. In this vein, Valeriano & Maness argue there is a history or unspoken
tradition in cyber operations to avoid casualties, and this could be institutionalized as a norm
for the field moving forward (2015). Regarding autonomous weapons, states parties to the
CCW should expand its scope to include these innovations and establish clear guidelines for
their development, deployment, and use. Philosopher Peter Asaro suggests, for instance,
ensuring "Meaningful Human Control" as a potential measure, in the sense of prohibiting
autonomous weapons of taking lethal decisions without human supervision (2020). In other
words, efforts should be made to develop a code of conduct for AI in military applications,
emphasizing transparency, accountability, and human oversight in decision-making
processes.

4.3 Regulating in Favour of Responsible Arms Transfers

 Manuel Enrique Noacco Rosende
manuelenrique.noaccorosende@sciencespo-lille.eu

States should exercise restraint in arms transfers to conflict-affected regions,

particularly when the recipient parties have a history of human rights abuses or violations of
IHL. In some proxy models, this might be favoured by the inherent instability of the relation
and the potential preference of the principal to gatekeep their most advanced technologies
rather than supply them to, for instance, a contractual or transactional proxy (Fox, 2021).
Arms export control regimes, such as the Wassenaar Arrangement and the Arms Trade Treaty
(ATT), should be strengthened to prevent the proliferation of emerging technologies to non-
state actors and rogue states. Nowadays, the countries with the most significant capacities
around emerging technologies are the USA and China, both of whom have nonetheless
expressed an intention to reach international regulations for these innovations (Valeriano &
Maness, 2015). I suggest the establishment of a supervising entity that oversees international
arm transfers, institution that should remain under the UN’s control while staying
autonomous from the exporting states. In this way, it could conduct rigorous risk assessments
and impartially assess the due diligence of the transfers to ensure compliance with
international legal obligations and ethical standards.

5. Conclusion
In conclusion, in this policy brief I have attempted to highlight the intricate interplay
between emerging technologies, proxy conflicts, and geopolitical rivalries, particularly
focusing on the role of autonomous weapons and AI in modern warfare and the role the
international community can have in regulating them. I have summarised the impact (and the
lack of it) of these technologies, ranging from tactical advantages to profound ethical and
strategic dilemmas. While cyber capabilities and UAVs offer operational efficiencies (by
reducing the amount of soldiers deployed and optimizing warfare) and potential avenues for
de-escalation (as seen in the retaliation produced by cyber attacks), the development of AI-
driven systems and autonomous weapons raises concerns regarding accountability and the
erosion of human control over lethal decision-making.

Addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach, including diplomatic

engagement, strengthened normative frameworks, and responsible arms transfer regulations.
Prioritizing dialogue and de-escalation measures in conflict-affected regions, bolstering
international norms and treaties to regulate emerging technologies, and reinforcing arms
transfer regimes to prevent proliferation to non-state actors are essential steps to mitigate
risks and promote global stability. Continued collaboration among states, international
organizations, and civil society is imperative to navigate the evolving landscape of modern
warfare and uphold principles of peace, security, and humanitarian protection in the 21st
century.

6. References
 Manuel Enrique Noacco Rosende
manuelenrique.noaccorosende@sciencespo-lille.eu

Asaro, P. (2012). On banning autonomous weapon systems: Human rights, automation, and

the dehumanization of lethal decision-making. International Review of the Red Cross,

94(886), 687–709. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383112000768

Asaro, P. (2020). Autonomous Weapons and the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. In Ethics of

Artificial Intelligence. Oxford University Press.

Favaro, M., & Williams, H. (2023). False Sense of Supremacy: Emerging Technologies, the

War in Ukraine, and the Risk of Nuclear Escalation. Journal for Peace and Nuclear

Disarmament, 6(1), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/25751654.2023.2219437

Fox, A. (2021). Strategic Relationships, Risk, and Proxy War. Journal of Strategic Security,

14(2), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.14.2.1879

Horowitz, M. C. (2016, February). Public opinion and the politics of the killer robots debate.

Research & Politics.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2053168015627183

Horowitz, M. C. (2020). Do Emerging Military Technologies Matter for International

Politics? Annual Review of Political Science, 23(1), 385–400.

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-050718-032725

Mueller, G. B., Jensen, B., Valeriano, B., Maness, R. C., & Macias, J. M. (2023). Cyber

Operations during the Russo-Ukrainian War: From Strange Patterns to Alternative

Futures. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep52130

Nasu, H., & McLaughlin, R. (Eds.). (2014). New Technologies and the Law of Armed

Conflict. T.M.C. Asser Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-933-7

Regencia, T., & Pietromarchi, V. (2024, April). Israel-Iran tensions updates: Calls for calm

as ‘drones downed’ in Isfahan. Al Jazeera.

 Manuel Enrique Noacco Rosende
manuelenrique.noaccorosende@sciencespo-lille.eu

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/19/live-israel-launches-missile-

attack-in-response-to-iran-assault

Valeriano, B., & Jensen, B. (2021, February). Innovation and the Proper Context of Cyber

Operations. Marine Corps Gazette.

Valeriano, B., & Maness, R. C. (2015). Cyber war versus cyber realities: Cyber conflict in

the international system. Oxford University Press.