---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: TomDispatch <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 8:36 AM
Subject: Tomgram: Michael Klare, The Coming of Hyperwar A Regular Antidote to the Mainstream Media
December 18, 2018
Tomgram: Michael Klare, The Coming of Hyperwar

[Note for TomDispatch Readers: It’s that time of the year when I always hammer away endlessly about donations. So many of you have been wonderful this year, but sadly we always need more. So here’s a little reminder about some of the splendid books you’ll find at the TD donation page. You can get signed, personalized copies of any of these for $100 ($125 if you live outside the U.S.). There is, of course, John Feffer’s riveting climate-change thriller Frostlands, just published this month by Dispatch Books; historian Alfred McCoy’s hit, In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power; Rebecca Gordon’s grimly fascinating American Nuremberg; Nick Turse’s bestselling Vietnam War book, Kill Anything That Moves; and a variety of my own books, ranging from this year’s A Nation Unmade by War to my old (but still eerily relevant) history of Cold War America, The End of Victory Culture, among others. Click here, go to our donation page, and check it all out. Tom]

Imagine, for a moment, a country that no longer rebuilds or reinforces its sagging infrastructure but just can’t stop pouring money into its military. Oh wait, you don’t have to imagine that at all! You just have to look at the United States. This fall, for instance, the president who swore he was going to give us an infrastructure plan that would blow our minds discovered that, after a tax cut for billionaires, a ballooning national debt, and a staggering $716 billion Pentagon budget, there were few dollars left over for much of anything else. In October, Donald Trump began talking about cutting agency spending by 5% across the board and about a possible $700 billion limit on the 2020 Pentagon budget. As December began, he became even more emphatic on that point, tweeting that he should talk to the Chinese and Russian presidents about halting an arms race and so cut down on military spending that was... well, not to put too fine a point on it, “Crazy!

Hmm... and just how long did that sentiment survive? Well, that was Monday, December 4th. On Tuesday, the newly nominated head of U.S. Central Command, Lieutenant General Kenneth McKenzie, appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee and insisted that any future Pentagon budget below $733 billion would “increase risk and that risk would be manifested across the force.” That very day, Secretary of Defense James Mattis and the chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Services committees, Congressman Mac Thornberry (R-TX) and Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) trooped to the White House for a lunch meeting. The next thing anyone knew, the 2020 Pentagon budget was to be a modest $750 billion. "The President fully supports the National Defense Strategy and continuing to rebuild the military," an administration official told CNN. "With the help of Sen. Inhofe and Chairman Thornberry, President Trump agreed to $750 billion topline."

Well, honestly, what can you expect of a Pentagon incapable of auditing itself? How could it possibly solve a total stumper of a division and subtraction problem like: What’s 5% less than its 2019 budget? (And here’s a little footnote to that change in numbers: Senator Inhofe walked out of that lunch and within the week had purchased “tens of thousands of dollars of stock in one of the nation’s top defense contractors.” Raytheon, to be exact.  When that buy made news, he blamed it all on his “financial adviser,” claimed to know nothing about it, and cancelled the order.)

And then, of course, there’s always the purely secondary question: What is the U.S. military -- its budget already bigger than of that those of god-knows-how-many-other countries combined -- going to spend all that money on? Fortunately, TomDispatch regular Michael Klare has a thought on the subject. He suggests that, in the years to come, increasing billions of those dollars are going to be invested in creating a future battlespace in which “intelligent” machines fight our wars and, in the end, the only role left for humans may be the dying. In other words, we’re heading for a militarized, remarkably automated, artificially intelligent hell on Earth. What about an $850 billion budget, just to ensure that we’re the first ones there? Tom

“Alexa, Launch Our Nukes!”
Artificial Intelligence and the Future of War
By Michael T. Klare

There could be no more consequential decision than launching atomic weapons and possibly triggering a nuclear holocaust. President John F. Kennedy faced just such a moment during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 and, after envisioning the catastrophic outcome of a U.S.-Soviet nuclear exchange, he came to the conclusion that the atomic powers should impose tough barriers on the precipitous use of such weaponry. Among the measures he and other global leaders adopted were guidelines requiring that senior officials, not just military personnel, have a role in any nuclear-launch decision.

That was then, of course, and this is now. And what a now it is! With artificial intelligence, or AI, soon to play an ever-increasing role in military affairs, as in virtually everything else in our lives, the role of humans, even in nuclear decision-making, is likely to be progressively diminished. In fact, in some future AI-saturated world, it could disappear entirely, leaving machines to determine humanity’s fate.

This isn't idle conjecture based on science fiction movies or dystopian novels. It’s all too real, all too here and now, or at least here and soon to be. As the Pentagon and the military commands of the other great powers look to the future, what they see is a highly contested battlefield -- some have called it a “hyperwar” environment -- where vast swarms of AI-guided robotic weapons will fight each other at speeds far exceeding the ability of human commanders to follow the course of a battle. At such a time, it is thought, commanders might increasingly be forced to rely on ever more intelligent machines to make decisions on what weaponry to employ when and where. At first, this may not extend to nuclear weapons, but as the speed of battle increases and the “firebreak” between them and conventional weaponry shrinks, it may prove impossible to prevent the creeping automatization of even nuclear-launch decision-making.

Click here to read more of this dispatch.


Visit our sister sites:

The Nation Institute
Nation Books
The Investigative Fund


Recent Posts
2 days ago...
Tomgram: John Feffer, The New World Order Is Here

5 days ago...
Tomgram: Nomi Prins, A World That Is the Property of the 1%

1 week ago...
Tomgram: Subhankar Banerjee, The Vanishing

9 days ago...
Tomgram: Engelhardt, In the Shadow of Donald Trump


Recent Highlights
1 month ago...
Tomgram: Nomi Prins, The Disrupter-in-Chief

1 month ago...
Tomgram: John Feffer, The Jaws Presidency


Consider supporting TomDispatch by making a donation. Click here.

The Nation Institute · 116 E. 16th Street · 8th Floor · New York, NY 10003 · USA