	Introduction1

Many analysts and officials have indicated that this is a critical time in the research, development, and deployment of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS), both in the United States and throughout the world. Congress has an important role to play, either as part of the public discourse regarding the future of such capabilities and appropriate policy to address them, or "behind the scenes" via its funding authority and oversight responsibilities 

	Role of Congress

Questions related to the research on, and development and deployment of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS) have been controversial for many years. LAWS are a component of the DOD's ongoing "third offset" strategy. Robotics and autonomous systems have been highlighted by the DOD as a component of this overall future effort of the U.S. military. The use of LAWS involves many moral, ethical, and strategic issues beyond considerations of military advantage. For example, as discussed below, opponents of the development of LAWS argue, variously, that such weapon systems entail unrecognized long-term risks: strategic, such as undesirable escalation or difficulty maintaining control of the technology; legal, such as the inability of LAWs to discriminate between civilian and military targets; and ethical, because they place a machine in position to make a "discretionary" decision about human lives. The DOD currently internally regulates the research, development, and deployment of autonomous weapon systems via DOD Directive (DODD) 3000.09, Autonomy in Weapon Systems (2012). There has been some recent consideration of LAWS at the United Nations via the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), the treaty that serves to restrict or ban internationally the use of certain weapons that are indiscriminant or that cause unnecessary suffering, which the United States ratified in 1995. Even in the absence of statutory regulatory action, congressional budgetary action on weapon system funding, as well as areas of research and development, will provide a direction for military development. Leverage Civilian Technology

Focus on lethal autonomous weapon systems may also be potentially beneficial for the United States because it capitalizes on current advances in civilian autonomous technology. First, many contend that an arms race is already in progress, with peer and near-peer competitors currently developing autonomous weapon systems—regardless of U.S. development of these systems. Hacking/Subversion

Another perceived risk with the use of autonomous weapon systems is that reliance on autonomous systems increases the military's vulnerability to hacking or subversion of software and hardware. "Military advantage" is perceived to be an inherently complex and flexible value, not susceptible to simulation by an autonomous system. These concerns are further discussed below.
The current research and future deployment of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS) is actively under discussion throughout the military, nongovernmental, and international communities. This discussion is focused, to various degrees, on the military advantage to be gained from current and future systems, the risks and potential benefits inherent in the research and deployment of autonomous weapon systems, and the ethics of their use. Restrictions, if any, in treaty and domestic law, as well as the specific rules governing procurement and use of LAWS by the military, will all rely to varying degrees on congressional action, and likely face future legislative debate.
Although autonomous weapons have historically been an artifact of fiction, recent commercial and military developments are driving widespread consideration of autonomous weapon systems. Military experience and success with semi-autonomous systems make fully autonomous weapon systems increasingly conceivable for military professionals. Moreover, the commercial development of robotics and expert systems (software that models relatively nuanced decision-making by humans during performance of specific skills) potentially applicable to military purposes makes lethal autonomy more attainable. The Department of Defense (DOD) "third offset" strategy (a plan for incorporating advanced technology into U.S. warfighting), with its focus on technological innovation and "outside the box" solutions to manpower and monetary limitations, includes these systems among other elements. Finally, the development of LAWS is perceived as occurring or likely to occur among many potential peer and asymmetric adversaries.
Congress is, or may be, involved in the development of LAWS in many ways. First, because no statute currently governs research, development, or deployment of LAWS, the DOD regulation issued on the subject has become the de facto national policy on military autonomous weapons. Congressional action could clarify DOD priorities in these weapon systems' development. Also, congressional involvement in LAWS may include specific budgetary decisions, as well as overall appropriations. Key nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) such as Human Rights Watch, among others, are urging international action, and—partially in response—the United Nations has been considering lethal autonomous weapons for a number of years as part of its responsibility to consider new protocols under the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, the treaty that serves to restrict or ban internationally the use of certain weapons that are indiscriminant or that cause unnecessary suffering.
This report seeks to familiarize congressional readers with some existing semi-autonomous weapon systems and outline the current debate and discussion involving the research, development, and use of fully autonomous systems.