There is a clear consensus emerging among states that recognizes the urgency of developing a meaningful legal framework on autonomous weapons. According to Automated Decision Research, a research group that tracks state support for laws on autonomous weapons systems, out of 195 countries, 129 (66%) are in favor of legally binding instruments while only 12 countries (6%) oppose the idea with another 54 (28%) remaining undecided. This widespread international concern underscores the urgency of addressing the profound ethical, humanitarian, and security risks posed by autonomous weapons.
This article will delve further into the political landscape, offering a brief overview of support or opposition to a treaty on autonomous weapons and the varying stances of states around the globe.
Support for International Regulations on Autonomous Weapons by Region
Africa
- The African Group, a United Nations regional bloc comprising 54 African states, issued a statement in 2018 urging the urgent launch of negotiations on a legally binding instrument to regulate fully autonomous weapons, emphasizing that weapons systems not under human control should be banned. The group further condemned the idea of transferring life-or-death decisions to machines, calling it “inhumane, abhorrent, repugnant, and against public conscience.”
- A joint statement delivered by Sierra Leone on behalf of a group of eleven states at the 2021 Conference on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), called for “an inclusive approach” to adopt a legally binding instrument aimed at prohibiting autonomous weapons systems. The statement emphasized the importance of upholding human dignity and preventing further international instability through such regulation.
- In April 2024, Sierra Leone hosted the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Regional Conference on the Peace and Security Aspect of Autonomous Weapons Systems. The conference concluded with the adoption of the Freetown Communiqué, a statement that affirmed the region’s united support for negotiating a legally binding instrument to regulate autonomous weapons systems.
- Egypt was the third country globally to advocate for a ban on autonomous weapons systems. During the 2014 Meeting of Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems under the CCW, Egypt expressed its concern over the rapid development of such technologies and their potential implications on international humanitarian law. The country emphasized the urgency of establishing a legally binding instrument to prohibit the development and manufacture of these weapon systems, as well as the regulation of existing systems within this mandate.
- In a statement at the Sixth Review Conference of the CCW in December 2021, South Africa cautioned against adopting an instrument that “is of a political nature only” and emphasized the importance of ensuring that any agreement has the potential to become a legally binding instrument.
Europe
- In December 2023 Austria introduced the first-ever resolution on autonomous weapons systems in the First Committee of the United Nations General Assembly. The following year, it hosted the Humanity at the Crossroads: Autonomous Weapons Systems and the Challenge of Regulation conference. According to its Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Austria takes “the clear position that significant human control over autonomous weapon systems is necessary and supports the international legal regulation of these weapon systems. The red line of allowing algorithms to decide over life and death must not be crossed.”
- Belgium co-sponsored and voted in favor of the resolution on autonomous weapons systems introduced by Austria, which emphasized the urgent need for the international community to address the challenges posed by autonomous weapons systems and called for the conclusion of a legally binding instrument by 2026.
- In a 2022 letter to the Dutch parliament, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of Defence of the Netherlands reaffirmed their commitment to advancing international efforts to ban autonomous weapons, particularly through the development of a CCW protocol.
- The coalition agreement formed by Germany’s government after the 2021 federal elections stated: “We aim to progressively integrate armed drones into international control regimes. We reject lethal autonomous weapon systems that operate entirely without human control and actively advocate for their international prohibition.”
- The Norwegian government platform commits to taking the necessary steps to regulate the development of autonomous weapons.
- At the 2023 Group of Governmental Experts (GGE), convened through the CCW, France stated that it was ready to negotiate measures on autonomous weapons without defining the final instrument.
Latin America and the Caribbean
- In February 2023, over 30 countries gathered in Belén, Costa Rica for the Latin American and Caribbean Regional Consultation on Autonomous Weapons Systems. The gathering led to the adoption of the Belén Communiqué, which called for the urgent negotiation of a legally binding instrument to regulate autonomous weapons systems.
- The Caribean Community (CARICOM) Declaration on Autonomous Weapons Systems, adopted in September 2023 declared commitment of states to “collaborate on endeavours aimed at negotiating an international legally binding instrument that prohibits unpredictable or uncontrollable AWS capable of using force without meaningful human control, and prohibit those designed or employed to apply force against persons, while implementing regulations for other forms of AWS”.
- At a 2021 CCW meeting in Geneva, Brazil, Mexico, and Chile issued a joint statement warning that, “without meaningful human control, the development, deployment, and use of autonomous weapons systems that can delegate decisions on duplication and execution of force to algorithms would … violate the principle of human dignity.”
North America
- Although Canada has not yet officially declared its stance, in 2019, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau issued a “mandate letter” to the Foreign Minister outlining the government’s intention to actively promote international efforts to ban the development and use of autonomous weapons.
Asia
- In March 2023, Pakistan highlighted the urgent need for an international legal instrument to regulate autonomous weapons. In its statement, Pakistan affirmed that “there is a clear case for developing an international legal instrument that includes prohibitions and regulations on the development, deployment, and use of LAWS, in order to fulfill the objectives and purposes of the CCW.”
- During the 77th UN General Assembly First Committee meeting, Türkiye stated, “the development and use of autonomous weapons systems which does not have meaningful human control are undesirable and conflict with international humanitarian law. Humans (commanders & operators) have to be involved in the decision loop and bear the ultimate responsibility when dealing with the decision of life and death.”
- The Philippines hosted the Manila Meeting on Indo-Pacific Perspectives on Autonomous Weapons Systems in 2023, which brought together representatives from 26 Indo-Pacific nations and six observer states. The Philippines has emphasized the urgent need to advance negotiations toward a strong and future-proof legally binding instrument to address the growing threats posed by autonomous weapons systems. In 2024, it warned that autonomous weapons could “lower the threshold for the use of force and escalate existing conflicts.”
- Sri Lanka’s Foreign Secretary delivered a key address at the Humanity at the Crossroads: Autonomous Weapons Systems and the Challenge of Regulation conference in Vienna. In the address, she reaffirmed Sri Lanka’s “long-standing policy on advocacy for conventional and WMD disarmament and application of humanitarian principles in warfare, including supporting a legally-binding instrument regulating and prohibiting the use of LAWS.”
- Malaysia also participated in the conference, issuing a statement expressing concerns that the negative consequences of using autonomous weapons “far exceed” any “legitimate military objectives” and called on the international community to maintain focus on developing a legal framework to regulate this technology.
- Indonesia has consistently advocated for the regulation of autonomous weapons systems through multilateral forums. In October 2022, during the 77th UN General Assembly First Committee, Indonesia expressed its position by stating: “We believe that machines should not kill people and therefore reject the automation of killing.” In 2019 it issued a statement on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) comprised of 125 states emphasizing the urgent need to pursue a legally binding instrument to address the humanitarian and international security challenges posed by emerging technologies in the area of autonomous weapons systems.
- China expressed its hope that, once a consensus is reached on the definition of autonomous weapons systems, parties to the CCW would “negotiate a legally binding instrument to limit and regulate fully autonomous lethal weapons systems.” Additionally, China emphasized that a “treaty framework is the appropriate means” to address the challenges posed by autonomous weapons systems, noting the “growing urgency” to adopt measures to regulate these technologies.
Oceania
- New Zealand has adopted a policy advocating for a legally binding instrument while recognizing that “a range of controls may be required” for different levels of autonomy.
- Kiribati supports a legally binding treaty on autonomous weapons, and a prohibition against anti-personnel autonomous weapons. It also advocates for prohibitions on AI-driven systems that hinder human understanding. It aligns with the ICRC’s definition of such weapons and supports its views on the treaty’s restrictions.
- Fiji recommended “the immediate start of negotiations for a legally binding instrument to prohibit autonomous weapons,” with prohibitions on systems independent of meaningful human control. It too supports a prohibition against anti-personnel autonomous weapons. It stressed the importance of swift international action to establish “robust legal frameworks that safeguard human dignity, ensure accountability, and protect the environment” to address the growing threat posed by autonomous weapons systems.
States Not in Support of a Legally Binding Treaty
Though there is strong, widespread support for international laws on autonomous weapons, a handful of states are opposed to the development of binding regulations. These include: Australia, Belarus, Estonia, India, Israel, Japan, Poland, South Korea, North Korea, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
The reasons for this opposition can vary. Some believe that autonomous weapons offer a strategic advantage, or that a ban would hinder their technological competitiveness. Many also believe that a ban would be premature and that autonomous weapons may even be more human than conventional weapons and we should have a better understanding of the technology before regulating it at the international level. Some countries, most notably the United States, have historically been skeptical of international law, seeing it as an infringement on sovereignty. The US remains the only country not to have ratified the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and, along with a few other countries including Russia and China, did not ratify the 1997 Landmine Treaty, citing the strategic importance of landmines in specific regions, such as the Korean Peninsula, and concerns about US military capabilities. Below is brief summary of some of the stances of states opposed to a legally binding instrument on autonomous weapons.
- India has expressed that a legally binding instrument on autonomous weapons would be “premature” and that it is concerned about widening the “technology gap” between states. At the same time, India has started investing in the development of autonomous weapons, including through partnerships with manufacturers such as Adani Defense and Aerospace.
- Israel has stated that there are “operational advantages” to using autonomous weapons and that existing international humanitarian law provides an adequate framework for governing their use. The country is actively developing, testing, producing, and using autonomous weapons systems.
- Russia firmly rejected any calls to negotiate a new international treaty on autonomous weapons, as well as any “moratorium on development” of such weapons. The Russian arms manufacturer, Kalashnikov, has reportedly been developing autonomous weapon systems (see here and here), which have been deployed in recent conflicts.
- The United States asserted that existing international humanitarian law, along with national efforts to implement it, adequately address the challenges posed by autonomous weapons systems. There are numerous American companies, such as Anduril Industries, Inc., that manufacture autonomous weapons. The US Department of Defense has also introduced the Replicator Initiative, a program aimed at rapidly deploying thousands of autonomous weapons systems across various military domains by August 2025.
A state’s policy position on autonomous weapons is not set in stone. Countries are continually shaping their stance as things evolve, influenced by new technological developments, ethical considerations, and shifting geopolitical dynamics. As the conversation around autonomous weapons continues, international forums will play a critical role in this ongoing dialogue, offering platforms for countries to exchange ideas, build consensus, and negotiate agreements that reflect global concerns.
More information on the key forums can be found in our article Key Forums Shaping the Global Debate on Autonomous Weapons Policies (upcoming).