The Very Long Game

Table of Contents

1. Frontmatter

   Download PDF-version

2. The Very Long Game of Defense AI Adoption: Introduction

   • Open Access

   Heiko Borchert

   Abstract

   The introduction contextualizes and summarizes the key results of the 25 case studies along the six lines of effort that constitute the analytical framework of the country analyses. First, it argues that core strategic motives, the role of partners and challengers, and a human or tech-centric understanding of defense AI shape the respective national approaches. Taken together the prevailing perspectives lead to a collective “lock-in” as all countries analyzed operate in a human and data-centric paradigm. Second, this affects current defense AI development priorities. Most nations develop AI in tandem with uncrewed systems, for example, for intelligence, reconnaissance, and surveillance missions, to support predictive maintenance and logistics, advance command and control, and further data analytics and data management. Third, in view of preparing for the use of defense AI many countries have set up new cross-functional entities to advance defense AI or improve AI-related technology developments. Most countries, however, have entrusted existing organizational entities with these tasks. In addition to organizational change at the ministerial level, some countries also introduce novel elements at service and command levels. Fourth, funding for defense AI is most difficult to compare as an internationally accepted spending taxonomy on defense AI is missing. Some nations operate in opaqueness as they do not publicly disclose financial figures. Others have dedicated AI budget lines, fund defense AI as part of ongoing procurement projects, and one country has ensured interagency funding. Fifth, in line with the development priorities, most nations also field defense AI for the use with uncrewed assets, followed by target identification/detection and data analytics. Almost every second country uses defense AI for predictive maintenance, logistics and simulation-based training. Most importantly, “learning by procuring” is an important inroad for defense AI to enter a foreign market via the defense solution procured from a partner. Finally, training for defense AI is evolving slowly. About a third of the countries focus on training only for the military service workforce. The same number of countries is also active in training civilian defense and military service workforces. Fewer countries also look at training the defense industrial workforce. Some countries also launch dedicated data training initiatives.

   Download PDF-version

3. Risky Incrementalism: Defense AI in the United States

   • Open Access

   Lauren A. Kahn

   Abstract

   The United States remains the world’s preeminent military and technological power. Over the last decade, the United States has increasingly viewed artificial intelligence (AI) proficiency as a vital U.S. interest and mechanism for assuring U.S. military and economic power, recognizing its potential as a force multiplier. As a result, the United States is actively implementing AI across its defense and armed services, with notable applications in Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR), Cyber, Autonomous Systems, Command and Control, Disaster Relief, and Logistics. The United States government is generally well-placed to leverage defense AI and AI-enabled systems. However, various bureaucratic, organizational, and procedural hurdles have slowed down progress on defense AI adoption and technology-based innovation such that the Department of Defense has yet to successfully, on a broad scale, translate commercial AI developments into real military capabilities. The U.S. Department of Defense suffers from a complex acquisition process and a widespread shortfall of data, STEM, and AI talent and training. Organizations working on AI and AI-related technologies and projects are often siloed, separated not only from each other but also from necessary data and other resources, and there exists within the department a culture that favors tried-and-true methods and systems, sometimes trending towards Luddism. In the last few years, however, the Defense Department has made substantial headway on some of these challenges, restructuring its approach to defense AI. However, whether these new AI efforts will be sufficient to allow the U.S. to make up for time lost remains to be seen.

   Download PDF-version

4. When the Teeth Eat the Tail: Defence AI in Canada

   • Open Access

   Robert C. Engen

   Abstract

   Canada is in trouble when it comes to defence artificial intelligence (AI) and is positioned to become a cautionary tale of the early AI years. Although Canada is well-placed globally for AI research, development, funding, and implementation, the country’s defence force is badly positioned to embrace digital transformation. This is a consequence of the organization’s structure, history, and culture, rather than of technical shortcomings. Without remedy, Canada’s AI systems will be small-scale projects, spread throughout siloes within the military complex, with almost no cross-pollination between them. These AI systems will be focused on hyper-specific operational and tactical uses cases faced by the various commands. Currently, Canada focuses primarily on data analytics, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, mine clearing, targeting and medical services. Defence AI research is supported by significant government funding. However, the Canadian Armed Forces face an uphill struggle in their attempts to both recruit new talent as well as make proper use of the existing talent within the armed forces in defence AI.

   Download PDF-version

5. Bright Prospects, Big Challenges: Defence AI in the United Kingdom

   • Open Access

   Kenneth Payne

   Abstract

   The UK is strategically positioned to capitalize on advancements in AI, especially in the realm of national security. It has taken significant steps in this direction by formulating an AI strategy for defence and national security, engaging in collaborative efforts across government, industry, and academia. The British military is actively experimenting with autonomous platforms and exploring new doctrines for their effective utilization, including aerial drone swarms, pilotless “loyal wingmen,” unmanned submersibles, and tactical ground robots. Partnerships with industry and academia are being strengthened, and autonomous systems are already being employed in data processing and intelligence analysis. However, several challenges lie ahead, including uncertainty regarding AI’s future development and concerns about its ethical implications and performance, particularly in the face of adversarial countermeasures and potential biases. Britain’s aspiration to maintain full spectrum military and intelligence capabilities on a global scale while undergoing significant technological transformation presents formidable challenges, especially given the need to balance these ambitions with a large and growing defence budget. Economic and political uncertainties, including those stemming from Brexit and low productivity, further complicate the situation. These challenges extend beyond immediate defence budgeting, impacting the country’s research base, attractiveness to investment, and ability to attract high-skilled migration. Despite these obstacles, the UK remains committed to advancing its defence capabilities and leveraging AI to address evolving security threats.

   Download PDF-version

6. A Fertile Soil for AI? Defense AI in Sweden

   • Open Access

   Alastair Finlan

   Abstract

   Sweden is well positioned to develop AI for civil and military applications because of bold strategic initiatives by the government and private foundations. The fertility of the Swedish AI soil for defense applications is though dependent on what is nurtured now in the face of competing priorities including the revitalization of its armed forces, looming NATO membership and the resurrection of the total defense concept. Sweden’s long intellectual interest in AI makes this high-tech Nordic nation with a flair for engineering achievements very suited for Fourth Industrial Revolution developments. Sweden’s culturally-infused and porous civil military relations have an unusual intimacy that bodes well for defense AI. It encourages the interflow of ideas, initiative, and technologies across and within these sectors. Sweden’s official recognition in 2018 of the importance of AI brought the government into alignment with the influential private sector. The Wallenberg AI, Autonomous Systems, and Software Program (WASP) initiative is stimulating the higher education sector with essential funding for AI technologies and future generations of researchers. Sweden now possesses one of the most advanced supercomputers in Europe, which is an important national asset in the Swedish AI ecosystem. Sweden’s advanced military industry already employs defense AI systems with Saab at the forefront of sensor plus AI innovations. The take-up of defense AI in the Swedish armed forces is modest but growing. It is underpinned by strong conceptual work by the Swedish Defense Research Agency that suggests more substantial future engagement. The accession to NATO is also likely to open even more pathways for defense AI cooperation. The foundations for defense AI developments are very apparent in Sweden and the future is potentially very bright.

   Download PDF-version

7. Cautious Data-Driven Evolution: Defence AI in Finland

   • Open Access

   Sami O. Järvinen

   Abstract

   Finland has ambitious civilian AI goals and a highly ranked research and education system, but defence AI policies are somewhat less ambitious. Defence AI was first piloted for support functions, followed by applications in military capabilities now emerging in various R&D projects. The Finnish Defence Forces (FDF) lists AI as a priority research area with use cases identified in virtually all areas of defence. AI’s disruptive impact is already visible on the battlefield in autonomous systems, and a further revolution may emerge through dynamic electromagnetic spectrum management. Transceivers combining communications with electronic warfare capabilities could simultaneously provide situational awareness and achieve blue force communications inoffensively to civilian frequencies all the while intercepting enemy communications. Such AI applications could enable new concepts of fighting, but this would require the FDF’s organizational culture to become more conducive to experimentation. The FDF recognizes data availability and management as key for AI development, in particular machine learning. FDF’s new holistic Data Concept aims at more flexible data utilization, but legal and organizational barriers pose several challenges. Apart from a few innovative projects, Finland’s defence AI seems to be somewhat lagging behind the ambitious national AI policies of others, with a cautious and very gradual approach. Publicly available information paints a picture of AI being procured in military-off-the-shelf systems, even if FDF’s R&D portfolio hints at the possibility of various original applications. Finland’s NATO membership, its F-35 acquisition and corresponding industrial R&D cooperation with the U.S. may significantly boost AI development.

   Download PDF-version

8. Caught Between Today and Tomorrow: Defence AI in Estonia

   • Open Access

   Tomas Jermalavičius

   Abstract

   Estonia recognises AI as an increasingly important suite of technologies that will transform the defence sector and that the country must remain part of this technology’s wave, as its defence forces will have to remain interoperable with the allies embracing AI-enabled capabilities. Concurrently, it faces a major challenge of addressing significant capability gaps within the compressed timeframes to address the existential threat posed by Russia. Combined with resource constraints and scepticism within the military about emerging technologies, rapid capability build-up is pushing investments into defence AI development down the list of priorities. However, war in Ukraine is supplying insights into what effects the use of AI can have in a battlespace and pique interest in how small states could employ this technology to offset imbalances vis-à-vis a numerically superior enemy force. Some in-house development projects aimed at digitalising “kill webs”, enabling better information sharing and enhancing common battlespace awareness are also emerging as important vehicles for introducing AI. The Estonian security and defence industry, dominated by agile start-ups and small enterprises, is emerging as a significant driver of defence AI development and important source of concepts of AI applications in defence. Procurement of state-of-the-art weapon systems and equipment is also bringing the Estonian military into close contact with advanced technologies that include elements of AI, further necessitating increasing knowledge and competence in AI technology. Estonia will have to strengthen its military training and education system and find ways to leverage conscription and reserve training more effectively to enhance AI competence.

   Download PDF-version

9. Servers Before Tanks? Defence AI in Denmark

   • Open Access

   Andreas Immanuel Graae

   Abstract

   As one of the most digitized societies in the world, Denmark has a unique opportunity as a small nation to contribute to and benefit from the evolving landscape and global technology competition on defence AI. However, due to persisting strategic cultures and procurement practices the Danish defence is characterized by a platform-centric approach to force development and investments in hardware rather than software. Consequently, Denmark is still at an early stage on the path to adopting defence AI. Recognizing the increasingly central role AI plays in the global technology competition and on current battlefields, it has thus become clear that Danish Defence needs a major technological boost to remain relevant for its allies. However, the question of how exactly the technological boost should be accomplished and implemented into the organization remains uncertain and uncoordinated. The purpose of this chapter is to look beyond the technicalities and provide an overview of the current development and use of military AI in Denmark from a broader sociotechnical point of view that questions the double ambition of the Danish Government to be an AI frontrunner while at the same time restricting these ambitions to matters relating to security politics and ethics of defence AI.

   Download PDF-version

10. Master and Servant: Defense AI in Germany

    • Open Access

    Heiko Borchert, Torben Schütz, Joseph Verbovszky

    Abstract

    Germany’s defense AI path is caught in a “master and servant” logic. Germany struggles to readjust its input-driven strategic culture, which puts greater emphasis on the socio-political acceptance and legitimization of military power than on the effects it can achieve. As a result, Germany considers defense AI as a tool—the humble servant—subordinate to humans, who must always remain in the loop. Incrementalism dominates, which makes it difficult to assess what defense AI is expected to achieve and whether it delivers on this expectation. As a result, most German defense AI development projects focus on decision-making support and gradual improvements of other technologies in the fields of Command, Control, Computers, and Communications (C4) and Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance (ISR). An open-source intelligence system for crisis early warning, AI-based warning receivers for helicopters, and intelligent image processing for missiles feature among the more prominent, publicly known examples of fielded defense AI capabilities. In parallel to adapting defense structures, Germany has stepped up defense funding. While an aggregate number of German defense AI spending is not available, we contend that the country spends around €50M per year on AI-related software development. As defense AI also affects military education and training, the Bundeswehr’s Command and Staff College as well as the University of the Bundeswehr in Hamburg are preparing to adapt existing curricula and setting up new degree courses. Individual military services also explore opportunities for AI-enhanced simulation-based training, while different initiatives have been launched to train defense AI algorithms.

    Download PDF-version

11. Leveraging Data Science for Defence in the Digital Age: Defence AI in the Netherlands

    • Open Access

    Marierose M. M. Heineken-van Dooren, Roy Lindelauf

    Abstract

    Data science and AI play vital roles in realizing the Dutch Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) vision to work in a “data-driven” manner by 2035. Regarding these technologies, the Dutch MoD prioritizes responsible AI and data science, aiming for technological advancement, information-driven operations, while at the same time becoming a reliable player and advocate in the field of responsible AI. The Dutch MoD holds a human-centric view on AI as a capability multiplier. The Data Science and AI Strategy 2023–2027 emphasizes the importance of high-quality IT, data governance, and ethical decision-making using state of the art AI and data science methodologies. To gain new insights and support decision-making with the use of AI and data science, the Dutch MoD invests in enhancing knowledge and collaboration with public and private partners, while also experimenting internally with AI and data science on five key themes: autonomous systems, military decision-making and intelligence, predictive maintenance, safety, and business operations. The Dutch MoD commits to invest at least 2% of expenses of the defence budget in research and technology development and focuses on integrating AI into unmanned systems, decision support, logistics, and security. Collaboration and human oversight are emphasized through partnerships with EU and NATO partners, knowledge institutions, and industry. Educating personnel at all levels within the MoD on the use of data (scientific tools) and AI’s implications, including their ethical aspects, is crucial, with the Data Science Centre of Excellence leading in the field of academic knowledge enhancement. Overall, the Dutch MoD is dedicated to advance research, development, collaboration, and ethical principles in AI and data science to position the Netherlands as a leader in the responsible use of AI in the military domain.

    Download PDF-version

12. A Winding Road Before Scaling-Up? Defense AI in France

    • Open Access

    Kévin Martin, Lucie Liversain

    Abstract

    France recognized the importance of AI in 2017 when it launched a national strategy to become a world leader in AI. The French Ministry of the Armed Forces published the strategy “AI in service of defense” in 2019, outlining ethical frameworks, infrastructure development, research priorities, and international collaboration. This strategy aimed to create trustworthy AI for defense applications while also embracing dual-use advances on AI in the commercial sector. If AI governance has taken shape, the French MoD’s action can appear very fragmented for the defense ecosystem considering the requirements of different military services, the Procurement Agency (DGA) and the new entities created as part of the Armed Forces digital transformation. To implement its sovereign AI strategy, France’s ecosystems benefits from a relatively dense academic and research base as well as industrial companies (AI startups, specialized SME and traditional Defense players adapting their strategy). In this context, ARTEMIS.IA emerged in 2017, a programme originally designed to build the defence AI ecosystem. In addition, the Armed Forces have adopted a development by trial approach. This profusion of initiatives at various levels and taken by different military branches may illustrate the lack of a centralized data-sharing policy, favoring ad hoc development frameworks. Moreover, experiments conducted so far have identified major roadblocks such as the need to develop adequate digital infrastructure including clouds, access to users, and adjusting budgetary and contractual mechanisms to the reality of agile software development. The updated defense AI strategy expected in 2024 will need to take these elements into account to meet the challenges of developing trusted AI techniques and solutions.

    Download PDF-version

13. Waking Up Slowly: Defense AI in Spain

    • Open Access

    Raquel Jorge Ricart

    Abstract

    In Spain, discussions on defense AI are integrated within the broader national security discourse rather than being a standalone topic. Until around 2020, AI was not a central focus in the Spanish defense ecosystem, but the beginning of the 2020s saw a shift towards specific principles, roadmaps, and initiatives governing AI implementation. Acknowledgment of Spain’s lag in defense AI development highlights the need for improvement to enhance international positioning and competitiveness. The governance system for defense AI involves coordination among relevant institutions, with calls for increased funding, project diversification, and enhanced transparency in project documentation. While few large companies dominate the defense AI market, there is a suggestion to prioritize small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to diversify services and expand market footprint. Defense AI intersects with strategic sectors like aerospace and cybersecurity, necessitating further efforts to synergize with emerging technologies such as quantum computing. Training and human capital development in defense AI are identified as areas needing improvement, with calls for universities to actively include defense AI in their curricula in compliance with national and European regulations and fundamental rights.

    Download PDF-version

14. Exploring the Benefits of a New Force Enabler: Defense AI in Italy

    • Open Access

    Andrea Gilli, Mauro Gilli, Ivan Zaccagnini

    Abstract

    Italy is striving to bridge its gap in defense Artificial Intelligence (AI) despite being a latecomer in the field. This pursuit aligns with broader efforts towards digitalization and modernization, particularly within its Armed Forces. Acknowledging AI’s potential benefits and threats, Italy emphasizes human involvement in decision-making processes while advancing modernization initiatives. Italy sees defense AI as a force multiplier, enhancing Armed Forces capabilities through sensor sophistication, automation, data fusion, and decision-making support.

    The commitment to modernize dates back to the early 2000s, notably with the Forza NEC program launched in 2007. Aimed at integrating military assets into a network-centric framework by 2031, this initiative seeks to enhance computation, communication, and situational awareness. In 2021, the Ministry of Defense allocated €190M for AI development until 2035, marking a significant investment exclusively focused on defense AI. However, several programs, including the ambitious Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) and Robotics and Autonomous Systems Experimentation Campaign (RAS), are going to involve AI technologies.

    The Italian Armed Forces collaborate and synergize on their key projects with the country’s whole AI ecosystem, which includes academic institutions, civil and military research labs, startups, and private and public high-tech companies. In addition, most Italian defense AI development projects are designed to optimize resources while also ensuring integrability and interoperability among its Armed Forces branches as well as NATO allies and platforms—this is also true for AI and training. The Italian Armed Forces have set their key goals for 2035, but it remains to be seen if they will be able to accomplish them by that year.

    Download PDF-version

15. Harnessing the Potential: Defense AI in Greece

    • Open Access

    Nikolaos Karampekios, Konstantinos Sakalis, Iraklis Oikonomou

    Abstract

    This chapter seeks to shed light on the efforts of the Greek defense ecosystem to prepare for and adopt defense AI, as well as on the perceptions and considerations that have shaped these efforts. In line with the platonic phrase “necessity is the mother of invention,” the Greek defense establishment has been a quick adopter of AI and its defense promises for several reasons. These include long-standing bilateral problems with neighboring countries, the potential to apply defense-related AI to the civilian realm and vice versa, and an innate understanding of the need to ride the current scientific and technological wave. Overall, it is concluded that concrete steps have indeed been taken to harness the potential of the technological and operational “window of opportunity” that AI presents. However, the analysis notes the persistence of challenges, including the need to enhance cooperation with the science establishment, to strengthen participation in collaborative RD&I projects in line with current and operational requirements, to maximize the benefits for the domestic ecosystem from the procurement of cutting-edge defense equipment, and to establish a single administrative point for the establishment and implementation of a unified defense AI vision.

    Download PDF-version

16. Enabling Technology of Future Warfare: Turkey’s Approach to Defense AI

    • Open Access

    Çağlar Kurç

    Abstract

    Defense artificial intelligence (AI) development in Turkey focuses primarily on improving the capabilities of autonomous systems, sensors, and decision support systems because Turkey believes autonomous systems are the future of modern warfare. Hence, autonomous systems, mainly uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs), have remained a priority in Turkish AI development since 2011 and have expanded to include all types of uncrewed vehicles. Increasing autonomous systems’ capability in intelligence gathering and fighting, as well as enabling swarm operations, are prioritized in developing defense AI. While Turkey enhances the capabilities of autonomous systems, humans will continue to be critical for decision-making in the foreseeable future. However, the fast pace of developing and deploying autonomous systems exacerbates the dilemma of human-machine interaction. Turkey believes that AI enhancements to decision-making systems would help humans make quicker decisions and ease human-machine interactions. Thus, Turkey specifically focuses on AI-related technologies like machine learning, computer vision, and natural language processing with an application focus on autonomous vehicles and robotics. The intertwined development of AI and related technologies form the core of Turkey’s AI ecosystem. Turkey’s AI ecosystem is nascent but growing. Turkey aims to create synergies between its defense and civilian industries, academic institutions, and government through various ecosystem initiatives. Turkey seeks to increase its R&D spending on AI to increase employment and grow the ecosystem. Training and managing a skilled workforce are essential to building the indigenous AI development capacity that Turkey is looking for.

    Download PDF-version

17. High Hopes Amid Hard Realities: Defense AI in Russia

    • Open Access

    Katarzyna Zysk

    Abstract

    Notwithstanding the challenges on the battlefield in Ukraine, as well as economic and political struggles at the home front, Russia continues the pursuit of selected defense application of AI technologies. Traditionally, Russia has viewed advanced technology as crucial for achieving military effectiveness and strategic advantage. Seen from Moscow, gaining or losing ground in the ongoing contest for cutting-edge military technology and more effective weapon systems will have far-reaching consequences for warfare and for national security, and, consequently, also for Russia’s position in the international hierarchy of power. Indeed, Vladimir Putin has been personally invested in pushing the AI development forward, driven by several other key factors. These include the expectation that AI can help Russia to narrow the military capability gap with the West faster, as well as the concern that adversaries may exploit new vulnerabilities that defense AI is creating. Moreover, lessons Russia has learned in Ukraine to date appear to carry an unequivocal message: AI-enabled weapons systems and infrastructure provide a clear battlefield advantage. This chapter begins with an examination of the Russian understanding of AI and Moscow’s incentives for engaging in what is seen as a global technology race. Subsequently, it analyses the evolving Russian approach to defense AI as articulated in key strategic documents shaping Russia’s AI strategy and policy. Next, it delves into Russia’s methods for developing defense AI. With its traditional state-driven, top-down innovation model, Russia is an outlier among global AI contenders. Yet to incorporate advances achieved in the Russian civilian sector, the model has been modified, partly emulating the US and Chinese approaches to defense innovation. This chapter further explores Russia’s priorities for fielding and operating selected defense AI systems. Finally, it addresses long-standing systemic problems and practical constraints that hinder the defense innovation in Russia. Despite these impediments, Russia is expected to continue prioritizing AI development in selected defense applications.

    Download PDF-version

18. Survival of the Smartest? Defense AI in Ukraine

    • Open Access

    Vitaliy Goncharuk

    Abstract

    Before Russia’s invasion in February 2022, Ukraine boasted a thriving ecosystem for producing artificial intelligence (AI) solutions, leading Eastern Europe in AI company numbers and hosting R&D offices of multinational giants like Amazon and Google. Despite this, Ukraine’s defense sector lagged in AI adoption due to a focus on traditional hardware. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has transformed the situation, with both sides employing AI in geospatial intelligence, unmanned systems, military training, and cyber warfare, making this conflict the first to feature AI competition as a critical factor. Ukraine’s resilience during the war has relied on active use of awareness systems, volunteer initiatives, open-source platforms, and decentralized asset utilization. The government has begun systematically formulating defense AI policy initiatives and fostering a new ecosystem while civil IT companies shift focus towards dual-use products and talent acquisition in AI. Current defense AI development priorities include AI for unmanned systems, to combat disinformation and support cybersecurity and to advance logistics and mine detection. In parallel, the war has advanced closer cooperation between universities and the military sector, also in view of advancing training and developing AI-enhanced simulation-based training. Overall, the conflict serves as a testing ground for foreign AI developers, prompting reevaluation of regulatory assumptions and the need for war-proof defense AI solutions.

    Download PDF-version

19. Embracing the Organized Mess: Defense AI in Israel

    • Open Access

    Inbar Dolinko, Liran Antebi

    Abstract

    Israel’s approach to defense AI is the result of an “organized mess,” triggered by Israel’s informal culture, the country’s tendency to let market forces push technology forward, a demanding security environment, and the need to be able to respond to new threats in a quick and flexible manner. Despite some challenges and shortcomings, such as an increasingly aggressive race for global AI dominance and limited resources, the country is still among the most advanced in the field of defense AI, relaying on the Israeli ecosystem’s distinctive advantage, born out of structural and organizational aspects. Mandatory and reserve services at the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) nurture and facilitate a unique exchange of personnel and knowledge. Moreover, IDF units indirectly support the AI ecosystem by supplying skilled personnel to academia and industry. Currently, there is no single Israeli body responsible for overseeing the field of defense AI. Nonetheless the Ministry of Defense (IMOD) and Israel Innovation Authority are shaping it by launching several key initiatives aimed at improving the necessary infrastructure and enabling further advancement in defense AI. Although Israel’s defense AI investment is challenging to quantify due to the lack of transparency regarding its defense budget, the significance of investing in AI has been recognized. Israel implements AI unmanned military systems in land, at sea, and in the air, air defense, cyber warfare, and logistics. Its prowess in AI for intelligence is evident in its diverse range of applications, which have contributed significantly to its military successes in recent operations, for example, against Hamas in Gaza. Overall, the growing role of AI has led to the need for additional training to all military personnel, especially commanding officers.

    Download PDF-version

20. Heavy Thunder, No Rain: Defense AI in Iran

    • Open Access

    Mahmoud Javadi

    Abstract

    Iran’s grand strategy revolves around three key pillars: regime’s survival, security, stability (S3). Viewing the United States, and to a lesser extent Israel, as enduring state threats aiming to disrupt S3, Tehran has increasingly prioritized asymmetric tactics in its defense doctrine. This approach aims to deter adversaries’ kinetic and non-kinetic operations while also positioning Iran to attain regional power status. The integration of AI into defense is seen as a force multiplier. Although Iran’s incorporation of AI into its defense capabilities and infrastructure remains in progress and lacks clarity, the regime is extensively focusing on enhancing its missile systems, proxy forces, Uncrewed Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), and naval power with AI technologies. Beyond state deterrence, Iran’s 360-degree defense doctrine places emphasis on safeguarding national critical infrastructure and ensuring domestic stability, both of which have recently been bolstered through AI. The defense infrastructure in Iran operates through a multi-layered approach, predominantly involving the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Army, and the Ministry of Defense. Each entity maintains low-profile research and development (R&D) facilities aimed at advancing AI capabilities or integrating AI technologies into existing systems. Given Iran’s practice of denial and deception (D&D) techniques in its defense technology investments, the exact budget allocated for AI remains undisclosed. However, notwithstanding the opacity surrounding defense AI R&D and budgetary allocation, all defense academies currently engage in training students and recruiting researchers in military applications of AI, a testament to Iran’s vision to progressively integrate AI into its arsenals in the future.

    Download PDF-version

21. Passive Ambitions, Active Limitations: Defence AI in India

    • Open Access

    Shimona Mohan

    Abstract

    India has been known by its ‘IT hub’ moniker for a while now and has sought to replicate this success in AI as well. However, while India has seen numerous knee-jerk developments and concentrated efforts around AI, it still has a hazy conception of how to establish a well-oiled AI ecosystem. Moreover, while civilian AI is still promoted through a whole-of-government approach, military AI is still comparatively much less prioritized despite India’s uniquely hostile neighbourhood and technologically advanced adversaries. In the last 5 years or so, India has established a few dedicated military AI bodies and unveiled several AI products for defence, either at the level of the tri-services or military R&D centrally – these include LAWS, robots, drones, radars, identification and recognition systems, translators, and monitoring and predictive systems. Despite these strides, the lack of institutionalization, incentivization, funding, upgradation and coordinated activity around military AI poses specific limitations to how efficiently India’s military AI ambitions are being realized. These restrictions are interestingly juxtaposed against India’s current focus on the indigenization of its defence technology production as it partners more vociferously with a diverse set of allies. If it intends to constructively work towards the grand ambitions it must become a military AI power, India needs to ensure that it looks at AI as the highly diversified technology it is, instead of the siloed approach it has adopted with respect to AI development, deployment and governance so far.

    Download PDF-version

22. ‘Overtaking on the Curve’? Defense AI in China

    • Open Access

    John Lee

    Abstract

    China has a clear focus on AI’s importance to the future military balance, and a well-developed and resourced system for developing relevant technologies. Yet by the judgment of seemingly most Chinese and many foreign analysts, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) remains far from implementing revolutionary uses of defense AI and is still grappling with institutional reforms and the demands of joint operations.

    But Chinese thinkers are working through the possibilities for AI to provide both symmetric and asymmetric tools for high-end conflict. China is already applying AI for military logistics optimization, training simulation and wargaming and weapons development. AI’s utility for data processing, decision support and enhanced command and control (C2) provides a path to the information dominance prized by Chinese military theory. Beyond current frameworks for kinetic and cyber operations, Chinese theorists are exploring new applications for AI such as intelligent systems and cognitive warfare.

    The Chinese Communist Party follows a materialist conception of human development and wields authority over all social institutions in China, including the PLA. Official judgments about AI’s structural importance, and of the need for China to be equipped for long-term strategic competition with the US, are thus unlikely to change. China is leveraging its dynamic civilian economy to boost defense AI development, within the larger context of a national drive for the commanding heights of AI and other emerging technologies.

    Whether methods that have worked as part of an integrated global economy can still deliver results under growing “decoupling” pressures from the US remains to be seen. The US in late 2022 introduced export controls targeting China’s access to advanced semiconductors, which were expressly justified by the imperative to constrain Chinese advances in defense AI.

    But China’s internal means for AI development are now sufficiently robust that analysts of military and strategic global affairs will find it imperative to watch this space, even as it becomes increasingly opaque.

    Download PDF-version

23. Overcoming the Long Shadow of the Past: Defense AI in Japan

    • Open Access

    Motohiro Tsuchiya

    Abstract

    Since the end of World War II, Japan has not had a full-fledged military, but only Self-Defense Forces (SDF) for the sole purpose of “exclusively defensive defense.” Hesitancy exists in society, especially in academia, to research and develop technologies that could be diverted to military use. This has created a long shadow of the past in which public opinion, strategic culture, and the academic-industrial ecosystem mutually reinforce each other not to directly address defense technologies, though Japan is often recognized as one of the most technologically advanced countries. However, with the recent deterioration of the national security environment around Japan, such hesitance is weakening, and research and development of technologies that can be applied to defense purposes is now being conducted, also in cooperation with partners like the United States, the United Kingdom, and others. Discussions about artificial intelligence (AI) for defense purposes began in earnest around 2022, with descriptions found in government and defense documents, and budget appropriations beginning to be made. However, the budget size is miniscule and no special organization for defense AI exists. In addition, there is no plan to use defense AI in earnest in defense operations, and it is merely positioned as one of the technologies that are attracting widespread attention. The defense industry is working on AI across the board, but Japan’s defense industry has a large proportion of civilian demand, and there are aspects of the industry that are not necessarily for defense use. If necessary, they will be applied to defense applications, but they are not actively promoted as AI for defense. Attempts to deepen the knowledge of AI among SDF personnel have only just begun.

    Download PDF-version

24. Will the One Ring Hold? Defense AI in South Korea

    • Open Access

    Youngwook Park

    Abstract

    South Korea sees artificial intelligence (AI) as central to its national vision, aiming to drive economic revitalization and bolster competitiveness. Backed by a history of state-led initiatives in technology and a robust information infrastructure, public support for AI and digitalization is widespread. The government's goal is to become an “AI powerhouse,” reflected in its national strategy likened to the “One Ring” from The Lord of the Rings, symbolizing a state-led technological utopia. Defense AI is integral to this vision, with the Ministry of National Defense focusing on modernizing the armed forces through AI integration. The government's approach emphasizes gradual development from recognition to decision intelligence, supported by establishing a National Defense AI Center and fostering a collaborative ecosystem. This strategy aims to break traditional defense procurement barriers and attract civilian talent from the information and communications technology (ICT) sector. Significant investment in AI development underscores this ambition. Efforts include integrating defense AI into surveillance, combat, and command and control systems, with plans for complex manned-unmanned combat systems and Joint All-Domain Command and Control Systems akin to US initiatives. South Korea also prioritizes education to nurture defense AI talent, collaborating with academic institutions and initiating specialized education programs. Military pilot units are designated to enhance human expertise in defense AI application, aligning with broader efforts to advance digital proficiency within the military. South Korea defense AI ambition benefit from robust government spending by the Ministry of Defense in cooperation with Ministry of Science and ICT.

    Download PDF-version

25. Intelligent National Defense Amid Strategic Ambiguity? Defense AI in Taiwan

    • Open Access

    Kitsch Liao

    Abstract

    Taiwan's defense AI approach is hindered by a historical legacy of authoritarianism, resulting in a disconnect between the civilian government and the defense establishment. This same disconnect also impedes Taiwan's strategic alignment to address the Chinese threat in a unified manner agreed upon by Taiwan's political leadership and its primary security ally, the United States. Additionally, this disconnect prevents effective collaboration between the defense establishment and Taiwan's vibrant civilian technology innovation sector to effectively develop defense AI. Current defense AI programs are fragmented and lack focus, often prioritizing emulation over innovation. For example, attempts by the Taiwan Air Force to integrate AI into future operational concepts have been ambitious technically but conceptually disjointed. In addition to a main focus on AI for close quarters air combat, Taiwan also has projects for support tasks, to advance predictive maintenance, for IT network management, and to assist space-based assets. Currently fielded AI applications are much more limited in scope, including medical training devices and predictive maintenance. However, Taiwan has also been consistently spending a higher-than average portion of its GDP on the civilian side of technology innovation and received stellar results in AI development and application. In summary, there is no shortage of grassroots ideas within and outside Taiwan's defense establishment for defense technology innovation. If Taiwan can better channel grassroots talent and solutions into a more open defense innovation ecosystem, it could significantly benefit from the adoption of defense AI in confronting the threat posed by China.

    Download PDF-version

26. Reimagining Defense Innovation: Defense AI in Singapore

    • Open Access

    Michael Raska

    Abstract

    This chapter explores conceptual, organizational, and technological development of AI in Singapore’s defense and military innovation paths and patterns. It argues that Singapore’s thinking about defense AI is driven through broader technological innovation and defense management imperatives, not only in meeting the Singapore Armed Forces future operational requirements but perhaps more importantly, sustainment of these technologies and capabilities in synergistic applications within Singapore’s civil-military innovation ecosystem. In the process, the development of AI in defense is conditioned by policy imperatives for responsible innovation and AI governance—responsible, reliable, robust, and safe AI in defense innovation and military use. These are embedded in Singapore’s ‘Ops-Tech’ model of defense innovation, which fosters a deep operational understanding, technology expertise, and collaborative culture between the varying actors in Singapore’s defense ecosystem. Equally important are also organizational aspects such as collaborative defense planning that relies on diverse networks within and outside the defense ecosystem– the military, government agencies, and increasingly private tech companies sharing data and best practices to tackle Singapore’s complex security challenges and risks in novel ways. Finally, the chapter highlights Singapore’s implementation of AI-oriented defense and military innovation, focusing on specific examples of SAF’s digitization, robotization, and sensor revolution in the context of the SAF 2040 transformation.

    Download PDF-version

27. Evolution Not Revolution: Defence AI in Australia

    • Open Access

    Peter Layton

    Abstract

    Middle power Australia has an active defence Artificial Intelligence (AI) program underway with a well-defined innovation pathway and numerous experimentation projects. The Australian Defence Force sees AI mainly being used in human–machine teams to improve efficiency, increase combat power, achieve decision superiority, and lower risks to combat personnel. The major equipment acquisition plan for the next two decades sets out six AI-relevant projects: one navy, one army, three air force and one in the information and cyber domain. Associated with this investment is a high expectation that Australian AI companies will have considerable involvement in the projects. The Australian defence AI sector, though, consists mainly of small and medium-sized companies that may need to partner with large prime contractors to achieve the requisite industrial heft. There are also wider national concerns about whether Australia will have a large enough AI workforce over the next decade to handle both commercial and defence demands. Accordingly, Australia is involved with collaborative AI developments with the United States including the “loyal wingman” fast jet drone, autonomous submarines and surface vessels, and robot land vehicles. Current defence AI plans will most likely lead to evolutionary improvements not revolutionary changes. AI is envisaged as being used to either enhance, augment, or replace existing capability. This approach means the future ADF will do things better, but it won’t necessarily be able to do better things.

    Download PDF-version