Could Artificial Intelligence Lead to Escalation of Conflicts? Chinese Researchers Think So

Since Xi Jinping came to power, China has undertaken increasingly risky military activities in the name of national security. seain the airand even in spaceAt the same time, Beijing has shown a growing unwillingness to responsibly manage military crises with Washington; Chinese officials refuse to use two-way communication mechanisms in the midst of crises, cut these channels following Nancy Pelosi's visit to Taiwan in 2022 and neglect to answer US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austins calls during the 2023 spy balloon incident.

By carrying out risky maneuvers in close proximity to U.S. forces and choosing not to use escalation management mechanisms, China hopes force a change as part of a legal U.S. operational activity, according to senior U.S. officials. While the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and the U.S. military lines of communication reopened At the end of last year, experts feared that bilateral crisis communication channels will be insufficient to limit the risks of escalation arising from future incidents.

According to Chinese military theory, Beijing believes it can profit from crises by to input[ing] opportunities they create. Like some American experts have arguedBeijing believes that military crises can open up strategic opportunities to gain an upper hand over its competitors. Moreover, in escalatory situations, achieve political goals seems to take precedence over minimizing the risk of clashes. Indeed, 2013 APL Official Guidelines posits that measured escalation may even be useful in achieving political goals.

But as artificial intelligence (AI) plays an increasingly important role in defense, a detailed review A study of more than 50 Chinese academic papers on the impact of AI on the future of warfare finds that many Chinese defense experts fear the technology could lead to rapid, uncontrollable, and potentially catastrophic conventional and even nuclear escalations.

***

Beijing’s belief in its ability to profit from crises is reinforced by its confidence in its ability to manage them skillfully. The PLA has been very vocal about the importance of controlling escalation, as evidenced by the topics highlighted in publications such as 2020 Edition of the Science of Military Strategyan official PLA document intended to guide military thinking and doctrine.

While China's view of what it calls control of the war situation has become more cautious in recent years, PRC strategists appear optimistic that Beijing can use strategic planning and technology to control the trajectory of local, computerized wars. Other Chinese theorists have claimed that Beijing is a follower to manage the escalation of conventional military crises. It is interesting to note, however, that Chinese military theorists are less optimistic on Beijing's ability to control nuclear escalation.

Certainly, while other United States studies emphasize that Chinese thought While escalation management remains somewhat underdeveloped, integrating AI into defense systems could be changing the beliefs of Chinese strategists in Beijing's ability to control escalation and profit from crises.

Understanding how Chinese policymakers view the relationship between AI and military escalation will be critical to predicting and responding to China’s behavior in future military crises. Moreover, Chinese experts’ concerns about the link between AI and military escalation could pave the way for bilateral discussions on how to responsibly manage the risks associated with AI use in certain military contexts.

The vast majority of these researchers, most of whom are affiliated with the PLA or organizations in China’s defense industrial base, fear that the accelerating pace of AI-assisted military operations, as well as the potential delegation of decision-making to machines, could cause uncontrollable conflicts. Moreover, the increasing complexity of AI systems and the difficulty of ensuring their explainability and reliability could make them unpredictable, increasing the risk of miscalculations. Experts also express concerns about the loss of control of autonomous systems whose actions could fuel escalation dynamics, and they argue that the use of AI for cyberattack and defense could provoke conflicts in cyberspace that could lead to dangerous escalations.

While researchers point out that the prevalence of AI on contemporary and future battlefields could lead to the escalation of conventional conflicts, they also worry that AI could make it more likely that conventional conflicts will cross the nuclear threshold. Nearly every article I reviewed that addressed AI’s role in escalation dynamics argued that the technology would make dangerous spirals harder to control.

Experts from the PLA-affiliated National University of Defense Technology, for example, note that large-scale military application of artificial intelligence [will] AI systems will further aggravate the uncontrollability of crises and their escalation, which could lead to the outbreak of wars. Researchers affiliated with the PLA Air Force agree, saying that AI systems will aggravate the uncontrollability of crises.

As AI systems continue to be plagued by explainability gaps, they may exhibit unexpected behavior that leads to accidents or even weakens[ing] Reliability of nuclear command, control and communication systems increases[ing] The risk of accidental nuclear conflict. Some experts note that the race to develop military systems with artificial intelligence could lead some countries to deploy them before they have been properly tested and evaluated. Their malfunction, the authors write, could lead to an uncontrolled escalation of the conflict.

Other PLA-affiliated experts note that the use and delegation of decision-making to lethal autonomous weapons systems on the battlefield can lead to an escalation of conflicts. [that] threaten strategic stability. In a similar vein, others note that autonomous systems could take actions that would push combatants toward infinite escalation in a crisis.

While none of these academic publications should be taken as official PLA guidance on the escalation risks associated with AI-based military systems, the articles reveal that a subset of Chinese defense experts believe that emerging technologies will have a significant impact on escalation dynamics in the not-too-distant future.

More importantly, these defense experts appear to disagree with the current theory of Chinese military crisis management, the vast majority of which was conceived before the advent of AI, which holds that China can not only control military escalation but also profit strategically from this dynamic. Indeed, they note that conventional conflicts will be more likely to spiral out of control and nuclear clashes will become more likely as militaries integrate AI into their systems, making it harder for China to responsibly manage and gain strategic advantages during crises.

Despite growing concerns among Chinese academics about AI’s potential to accelerate escalations, there is no sign that Beijing will soon change its approach or official guidance on military crisis management. But as China continues to make increasingly risky moves in close proximity to U.S. and third-country forces in many domains, it is all the more important for U.S. and Chinese officials to discuss the growing dangers of AI and autonomy before the next military crisis occurs.

THE Apparent thaw in mil-to-mil commitments This is an opportunity for Washington to engage with Beijing in discussions aimed at mitigating the escalation risks posed by military systems equipped with artificial intelligence for crisis management and escalation control. The fact that some Chinese academics recognize the growing risks posed by artificial intelligence and autonomy should reinforce the argument of American officials that both sides must find the best way to avoid incidents that could lead to unwanted and uncontrollable escalations.

In future editions of The official dialogue between the United States and China on AIit will be crucial to focus on the growing risk posed by new military technologies; Unofficial gatherings of US and Chinese military AI and nuclear experts are also useful forums for voicing concerns. Discussing nuclear and military AI issues with Beijing is rarely easy and often frustrating, but U.S. policymakers can engage with Chinese officials to try to understand their views on the impact of AI on conflict escalation and crisis management, and to determine whether those views align with those of the researchers discussed above. Such dialogues would also be useful venues for reinforcing the point that unchecked escalations are not in Beijing’s interests.

Even if binding agreements limiting the use of AI in certain military contexts cannot be reached in the short term, information exchanges through AI and military-to-military dialogues on these topics could lead to future cooperation on mutually beneficial actions. At a minimum, they could allow each side to begin to understand the other’s perspective on AI-related escalation risks. Furthermore, discussing the establishment of norms for AI use in times of crisis could help stop future spirals of escalation.

Given China's continued nuclear buildup, escalating tensions over Taiwan, and competition to develop AI and related emerging technologies, these discussions are more important than ever.