The “International system & World order - Africa” interviews Funmi Onolisakin from the King’s College in London. She is Vice President (Global Engagement) and Professor of Security, Leadership and Development at King’s. She is a founding member of the African Leadership Centre, She also worked in the Office of the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Children and Armed Conflict. Funmi Onolisakin talks about the role of the African youth, the influences of the foreign countries, and the decisions that African politics should make in order to improve their future.
Interviewing Team: Michele Tallarini and Alessandra Gramolini.
By: Shahin Modarres, Yasmina Dionisi and Filippo Cimento.
May God protect this land from foe, drought, and falsehood. This famous prayer engraved in the heart of Apadana Palace in Persepolis by the Persian Shahanshah Darius the Great has a particular meaning to Iranians, but why? Where do we stand 2570 years after these words were said?
What is sought out as a renewable alternative is a hydroelectric power, but it is clear how that a drought crisis makes it far from favorable. This comes at a dangerous price, considering Iran suffers from frequent shortages of power.
Different studies have been conducted on the topic, describing the relation between dry climate conditions and hydroelectric production. Saeed Jamali believes that “The expected climate warming could intensify droughts and dry spells, bringing to hydropower generation reduction, which is expected at the Saymareh, Saz Bon, Garsha, and Koran Bozan basins.”More in detail “because of insignificant streamflow reductions since 2020, hydropower production may not change considerably during this period. However, serious hydropower generation deficit is expected by the 2050s and 2080s”. But those are not the only regions that will be affected, in fact in Sadat Mousavi’s opinion is that climate change has the potential to significantly alter the hydropower generation in the Dez Dam basin. The results of the study showed a reduction in the flow of water and electricity generation for the Bakhtiari reservoir.” So, the scientific community is concordant in the necessity of seeking solutions. For instance, Pouya Ilfaei proposed the ideation of a management strategy of energy that works in a more efficient way, thanks to big data analysis.
Internal migration
The ultimate consequence of drought will be internal migration.
As mentioned above, scholars' voice agrees in considering the dangerous consequences of internal migration. First, Ali Mirchi underlines that “mass migration will increase more than we have ever seen” if “villages and rural areas run out of water, and livelihood will not be sustainable anymore”. Shahrzad Khatibi adds that “unplanned and irregular expansion of the main cities has contributed to overpopulation.” From the latter different problems derive, such as “urbanization and increasing water demand, while there is no match between demand and water availability”. The government should “reverse process of migration from the large cities of the country to smaller towns. Like in Tehran, where 20% of the population lives, the government should consider different short-term and long-term policies in order to decrease economic attractiveness”. The adoption of this kind of strategy is fundamental in order to avoid discontent related complications. In this regard, Rasoul Sadeghi warned that “Low levels of migration effectiveness underpin limited population redistribution. Spatial patterns reflect socioeconomic inequalities” which are relevant and develop in a gap between rich cities and underdeveloped countryside. Along with this situation, there has been “no policy concerns about housing costs, traffic congestion in destination areas.” But there is an even more complex process, internal to Tehran where overpopulation has made spatial inequality the distinguishing feature of urban unsustainable development.
Conclusion
As this conclusion is being written Iranians in different regions of the country are protesting against the mismanagement of the country's water resources whilst facing violent suppression by security forces. People in Isfahan have been peacefully standing where once Zayande Roud river lived, for more than a week now. Other cities particularly from the Southern and Central regions of the country are joining them to show their concern regarding a concerning lack of water resources. Agriculture and all related products face an unstable state where in many cases there are exist no sufficient water resources. Iran's source of hydroelectricity has also been seriously threatened by the same growing drought. The combination of both elements mentioned is generating a South to North pathway of internal migration, which foresees overpopulation in regions already facing the same problem on a more minor scale. Internal migration derived by drought is introducing many catastrophic factors, growing inhabitant zones is the least.
Advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technology is expected to drive progress and change in the areas of military, economy, and information. This so-called “fourth industrial revolution” opens various possibilities, among which the most probable one is further development and prosperity of those who will be able to reap the benefits, resulting in further strengthening existing inequalities in the global state system.
The main concern an average person has regarding the AI is the idea of the post-apocalyptical world in which the robots and AI have completely overtaken the Earth, as depicted in many famous science-fiction publications. To approach this topic it is necessary to have two things in mind. First, the developement of the strong AI (also called Artificial General Intelligence – AGI) systems that will focus on the simulation of human reasoning and creation of machine intelligence equal to the human currently does not exist, and the experts cannot agree on the expected occurrence of this type of AI. Second, artificial intelligence systems rely heavily on data. Therefore, the quantity, quality and availability of data are crucial. In the longterm, the ethical and responsible approach to data collection for AI development and implementation aims to guarantee a balanced and responsible innovation.
For example, the United States and the European Union countries have expressed dedication in developing trustworthy and ethical AI. At the other hand, countries like China and Russia have not shown such dedication in the development and employment of their autonomous weapons systems. Cyber policy and security expert Herbert Lin expresses the concern how due to lower level of regard towards the ethical and safety issues there is a likely opportunity that their weapons are going to be more militarily effective and developed sooner.
Different forms of government have different approaches towards AI development and implementation. China is characterized as authoritarian and hierarchical state, the United States is a federal republic with a democratically run government, while the European Union is described as a political and economic union with that operates through combination of supranational and intergovernmental decision-making approach.
PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
China defines artificial intelligence research and development as key to boosting national economic and manufacturing competitiveness as well as providing national security. China’s vigorous approach towards the AI development is caused by the potential economic benefit in the future. The experts assume that China will benefit from the highest relative economic gain from AI technologies, since the AI technology is envisioned to improve its productivity and manufacturing possibility and therefore to meet future GDP targets. Therefore, China faces the risk of AI development and application without giving enough attention to a responsible use of AI and preparing its citizen to adapt to possible changes affected by widespread AI adoption. China has already once fallen in the trap of recklessly rushing into uncontrolled progress, and it led to an unsustainable level of growth accompanied by a set of negative effects on China’s economy growth. China’s clear competitive advantage lies in its abundance of data which will most likely become one of the crucial elements in the future development of AI technology, relatively loose privacy laws, vibrant start-ups, and a stable rise in the number of AI engineers.
THE EUROPEAN UNION
The state structure shapes the design of the AI policy and its implementation. When discussing the EU it is important to keep in mind that the EU is not a country, but an economic and political supranational and intergovernmental organization. Considering the fact that economic prosperity and national security of the European Union are still firmly in the hands of the national governments it can easily be understood why the organizational structure of the Union hinders the process of making concrete and quick decisions which are always favorable in the conditions of the international competition. The EU has succeeded to publish joint plans and policies regarding AI, such as Civil Law Rules on Robotics, Declaration for Cooperation on Artificial Intelligence, Ethic Guidelines for Trustworthy AI, and Policy and Investment Recommendations for Trustworthy AI.
The European Union pays special attention to the study of the potential impact of artificial intelligence technology on the society. The researches usually involve social aspect such as data protection (e.g. GDPR law), network security and AI ethics. There are more substantial ethical or normative discussions when it comes to developing human-centered and trustworthy AI technologies. [...] Developing the culture of trustworthy AI and not only when it comes to security and defense, but more broadly about AI enabled technologies. This is at the forefront of the policy and political thinking in Brussels.“ claims Raluca Csernatoni, an expert on European security and defense with a specific focus on distruptive techologies.
In 2018 member states signed the Declaration on Cooperation on Artificial Intelligence where the participating member states agreed to cooperate in various fields regarding AI development and implementation, including ensuring an adequate legal and ethical framework, building on EU fundamental rights and values.
THE UNITED STATES
During the Obama administration National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) Committee on Technology drafted the report Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence in 2016. Concerns about safeguarding “justice, fairness, and accountability” if AI was to be tasked with consequential decisions about people had previously been mentioned in Administration’s Big Data: Seizing Opportunities, Preserving Values report and Big Data and Privacy: A Technological Perspective report. Regarding the governance and safety, the report advises that use of AI technology must be controlled by “technical and ethical supervision”.
Later, during the Trump Administration the 2019 AI R&D Strategic Plan expressed seven main fields of interest, one of which is understanding ethical, legal, and societal applications of AI. According to the recent EU-US Trade and Technology Council TTC it is clear that the current administration continues supporting the efforts for the development of responsible and trustworthy AI.
THE U.S. – EU COOPERATION
The most recent U.S.- EU cooperation on the AI advancement, the TTC, was launched on September 29, 2021 in Pittsburgh. TTC working groups are cooperating on discussing the issues of technology standards, data governance and technology platforms, misuse of technology threatening security and human rights, and many others. The United States and European Union affirmed their commitment to a human-centered approach and developing mutual understanding on principles of trustworthy and responsible AI. However, both have expressed significants concerns that authoritarian governments are piloting social scoring systems with an aim to implement social control at scale. They agree that these systems „pose threats to fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, including through silencing speech, punishing peaceful assembly and other expressive activities, and reinforcing arbitrary or unlawful surveillance systems“.
CONCLUSION
Different forms of governments differ immensly in their approach towards the development and implementation of AI, as well as when it comes to the necessary principles of ethics and responsibility. However, governments need to take further actions with great cautions. When implemented carelessly, without taking ethics and safety in consideration, AI could end up being ineffective, or even worse, dangerous. Governments need to implement AI in a way that builds trust and legitimacy, which ideally requires legal and ethical frameworks to be in place for handling and protecting citizens’ data and algorithm use.
Without doubt, security is the first and fundamental objective of governments involved in the building of a sustainable regional security in the Middle East but it is not the only one. On one hand, different actors are cooperating to counter the Iranian threat and the affiliated militias. On the other hand, multilateral cooperation is taking a way forward from the mere security interests, while economic and thus political aims are now being prioritized. One of the things that emerged especially in the last 20 years, is that the US role in the region is vitally important but it works much better when it is done through multilateral efforts of allies. In an ideal World one would see the inclusion of Russia and China in this multilateral work, but if not, it is up to the countries of the region, the US, the EU and other willing actors to try to take action to address the regional challenges. Up to now military action has played an important role—through aviation, maritime and border security; but we are moving toward an increased non-military cooperation.
In this frame, the Middle Eastern geopolitical scene has been shaken in recent years by a completely unexpected, almost paradoxical, convergence such as that between Saudi Arabia and Israel. In this case, the most significant episodes were perhaps the apparently repeated meetings, between 2016 and 2018, between the influential Saudi prince Turkī al-Fayṣal, former head of the secret services, and Tzipi Livni, co-secretary of the largest Israeli opposition party, together with General Amos Yadlinand his colleague Ya'akov Amidror, formerly head of military intelligence and National Security Advisor. Since those years, an intelligence-sharing program has begun between Saudi Arabia and Israel to monitor both the pro-Iranian non-state actors in the region, from Ḥizbullah to the ḥūṯī, and the advancement of the Iranian missile program.
In Riyadh, the hope is that Israel—through its influence on groups in Washington—will be able to coordinate robust pressure on the US political establishment to activate containment of Iran, by introducing or re-imposing sanctions, and possibly helping to reactivate Washington's commitment to defending the interests of all its traditional Middle Eastern allies. The Saudis therefore offered new demonstrations of loyalty to the United States, including a willingness to open a new chapter to secure Israel's future in the region.
Such normalization reflects nothing but the footsteps traced by Obama, Trump and Biden’s presidencies to leave responsibilities to local actors whenever US interests are not at stake. Also, it reflects a profound need for a sustainable regional security system that could develop simultaneously to the creation of ties of political and economic-financial nature and access to resources. An example is the announcement of the giant Dubai Port (Dp) World that it intends to settle in the Israeli port of Haifa or the maritime expansion strategy of the United Arab Emirates. This demonstrates a need for new funding and space to stay afloat in a crisis environment.
In this sense, the "Abraham Agreements" go toward this direction but do not come out of nowhere, in that they represent a tactical convergence between the interests of the actors involved. The Arab Gulf countries, including Qatar and Oman, have been cultivating economic-financial, intelligence and security relations with Israel for years, behind the scenes or in a semi-formal manner.
In 2015, the Emirates granted the Jewish state to establish diplomatic representation at the International Renewable Energy Agency based in Abu Dhabi. Together with Egypt, Qatar has been the main mediator between Hamas and Israel for years. In 2018, Oman formally received Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In the same year, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said in an interview that Israelis "have a right to have their own land" and that Saudi Arabia "has no problems with Jews". Also in 2018, Bahraini Foreign Minister Khaled ben Ahmad Al Khalifa even went so far as to take Israel's side against Iran. Commenting on the umpteenth air raid in Syria attributed to the Jewish State Air Force against alleged Iranian military bases, he stated that "Israel has the right to defend itself and eliminate sources of danger".
If the Turkish threat is added to the Iranian one, the Jewish state could be—together with Russia—a new factor of protection. Behind the curtain of the agreements also hides Saudi Arabia. If Bahrain has signed an agreement with Israel, it is because Riyadh has given the green light. Saudi Arabia then granted the opening of its airspace to air links between Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv. To do more, Mohammed bin Salman must wait to formally take power, so that his father - the over eighty and sick King Salman - passes away. Mohammed bin Salman’s ambition is to become the protector of all the holy places of Islam. Science fiction, at least for now.
Is this frame a solid basis for a sustainable regional security system? It is too early to answer and in the following 20 years changes will shape a new frame. As presented in this article, advances have been made and different actors are building a new unified front. Nonetheless, unanswered questions still remain. One of this concerns Iran and the future of the JCPOA. Should a comprise be found, and sanctions reduced, the unified front will undoubtedly accommodate the US. Nonetheless, the JCPOA works have proofed to be a failure in the past, and unexpected outcomes cannot be excluded. Moreover, the JCPOA will not be enough to tackle other issue but the nuclear one. While allies are talking to each other, and enemies are being included in such dialogue, religious and ethnic differences won’t be easily overcome through politics and economics.
From the battlespace of Europe to the borders of the Middle East to East Asia the Soviet Union and the United States did battle for the supremacy of the world. Millions of pairs, who inhabited the 20th century, considered it a fight for the end of history. Both powers used every means at their disposal including nuclear bombs, military espionage, finances, propaganda, cultural ties and many more asymmetric tools. Nearly everything the Americans and the Soviets designed, had an art of dying, but was an excuse for living. For this was the geopolitics of the Cold War.
Bernard Baruch, a financial adviser to presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt, to find the Cold War in 1948 as a rivalry between two superpowers, which at the time was the United States and the Soviet Union, who each proceeded to fill the power vacuums left by the defeat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. The Cold War was a competition between two systems - the US versus the USSR, capitalism versus communism, pluralism versus totalitarianism. The american-soviet struggle was present in the daily lives of people and shaped their identities and beliefs, from technology and espionage to business sports and movies. Nearly everything we hold dear today was formed by the Cold War. So in a way by studying the past we gained a better understanding of the present.
Most historians agree that the Cold War took place between 1947 and 1991. It’s origins however are much more profound and can be traced to the geographical pivot theory by historian Alfred Thayer Mahan, who wrote extensively on global politics. Mahan believed that whoever controlled the world's oceans would come to dominate global politics, since most people live adjacent to the sea. The notion was that a powerful navy allows one to project power by the way of the sea onto the commercial maritime routes that connect the globe. For instance, Mahan’s work encouraged the American government to purchase Alaska, annex Hawaii, construct a strong navy and confront Spain in a war. In global terms, Mahan’s book “The influence of sea power upon history” became mandatory reading in the German and French navies and even inspired the Japanese to fight the Russians in 1904. Considering his monumental impact, Mahan is often considered one of the most critical strategists in world history.
Holding the opposite view was geographer Halford Mackinder, who argued that global power belonged to whoever controlled the heartland. Although, he came a bit later than Mahan, Mackinder’s work would also mold the minds of policymakers to come and he is often considered the father of geopolitics as a field of study. In 1904 Mackinder wrote his most important thesis «The heartland theory», which divided the world in three bodies. The first was the world island, which consisted of Europe, Asia and Africa. The second categorization refers to the offshore islands like the British Isles and the Japanese archipelago, while the final group points out to the Americas and Australia as outlying islands. Within these parameters, Mackinder placed a special emphasis on the world island. This was the most populous and resource rich land combination. Whoever controlled the world island would gain the means to dominate the globe. Within the world island however was the heartland region, which stretched from the Volga to the Yangtze and from the Arctic to the Himalayas. This was the core domain of the world island power. A summary of this theory comes down to the following passage: “Who rules East Europe commands the heartland, who rules the Heartland commands the world island, who rules the world island commands the world”. Going by this theory, Mackinder explained international relations by observing how pivot islands were trying to conquer or at least prevent a singular power from dominating the heartland. This concept explains why Britain always fought against whoever tried to conquer continental Europe like Napoleonic France, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.
Alexander Dugin, for instance, who is a modern political analyst with close ties to the Kremlin, has repeatedly written about the need for a Russian based Eurasian power. In the late 19th and early 20th century, making this theory, especially the part concerning East Europe, became a source of inspiration for policymakers from Nazi Germany. Karl Haushofer, a politician and strategist from the Munich University, argued that Germany's national interest was to expand to the east.
Haushofer believed that to command authority over East Europe and thereby pivot into the heartland one had to control the eastern half of Europe as a collective unit, since the landmass was geographically defenseless and like the barriers like mountains and rivers. As Haushofer thought to promote a German Soviet alliance, because their collective output would have overwhelmed the coastal powers, such as France, the United Kingdom and the United States. Most analysts today would argue that there is merit to this claim. However, Haushofer ideas took a turn to the dark side, when Adolf Hitler took the queue and added it to his to-do list. Although Haushofer himself was not a member of the Nazi Party, his work influenced the Nazi leadership and laid the bedrock for what will become known as the leobens round. This infamous expansionist policy sought to permanently remove the indigenous populations of Eastern Europe and repopulate the land with German settlers with the ultimate goal, being to dominate the Heartland region and from there the world island.
From a geopolitical angle the Cold War was a testing ground for these theories, putting the global naval power, the United States against the Soviet Union, which controlled more land than any country. This clash would turn out to be the most epic international power struggle in history. It was essentially a game of chess on a global scale. The Americans sought to contain their Soviet counterparts wherever and whenever. Meanwhile, the Soviet leadership fought desperately to break out the containment by exporting its communist ideology. In the ensuing tug of war, alliances were made. Governments were overthrown and the international community was practically split in two. Underneath the disguise of ideology the age-old geopolitical rules guided the contest. So when Putin says that the breakup of the Soviet Union was a disaster, he isn't referring to the collapse of communism, but the disintegration of the heartland concept. In this regard, one can argue that the grand chessboard of the Cold War still presents the template of modern long-term global politics.
On October 23rd, the Colombian special forces arrested Dairo Antonio Usuga David, alias “Otoniel”, leader of the Urabeños drug cartel and paramilitary group, who had been on the run since 2011. The operation, carried out by a special team codenamed “El Blanco”, was initiated in early October, when the Colombian intelligence identified Usaga in the Uraba sub-region of Antioquia, north-western Colombia, not far from the Panamanian border. The fugitive was identified through the surveillance of cartel members who were carrying medical material for the treatment of a kidney disease that Usaga was known to suffer from. The special forces surrounded him in a remote mountainous area, while helicopters and drones flew over, and Navy ships were stationed off the coast to prevent a potential escape by sea.
In mid-April, Usaga had been spotted and photographed while onboard a longboat traveling between the Verde and Esmeralda rivers in the Paramillo area. The fugitive was accompanied by two armed men and a dog. That was the last time the cartel leader was photographed before his recent capture. In 2017 the US Department of State offered a $5 million reward for information leading to his arrest and, in 2017, Colombian police dropped flyers from helicopters offering a $5 million reward for information leading to his capture, but without any positive outcome. Between the end of 2020 and early 202, Colombian authorities intensified their efforts to capture Usuga, following an increase in levels of cocaine production.
Los Urabeños
The Urabeños, also known as the Gulf Clan (Clan del Golfo), take their name from Uraba, the already cited north-western region of Colombia, which is extremely important for drug cartels as it offers direct access to the Caribbean and Pacific coasts from the departments of Antioquia and Chocó. The group’s origins can be traced back to the far-right paramilitary force Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia-AUC (United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia) and to Daniel Rendon “Don Mario” who, after the 2006 demobilization of the AUC, took thousands of former fighters with him and expanded his drug trafficking operations and networks in the Uraba area, quickly expanding in over 15 departments including Cordoba, La Valle del Cauca, Santander, La Guajira and even the area of Medellin.
Don Mario was arrested by the Colombian police in April of 2009 and the cartel was taken over by the Usaga brothers, Dairo Antonio “Otoniel” and Juan de Dios “Giovany”, both former paramilitary members who had known Rendon since the 1990s.
“Otoniel” has an interesting background as he had initially joined the Ejercito Popular de Liberacion (Popular Liberation Army), a Colombian communist guerrilla group mainly active between 1967 and 1991, when it began to break apart. However, he soon switched sides and joined the far-right paramilitary and narco-group Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia, active between 1997 and 2006 against the FARC and ELN. It is interesting to notice how the Usaga brothers only had approximately 250 men at their orders when Rendon was arrested in April 2009. However, thanks to the two cartel leaders, the organization quickly grew in numbers, expanding operations and territory control. “Otoniel” took over the cartel in January 2012, when his brother “Giovany” was killed by the police during a raid in the Choco department. On that occasion, the new leader offered a $1,000 reward for each police officer killed in revenge for his brother’s murder. Usaga “Otoniel” had managed to escape capture for ten years, constantly on the move, hiding in grueling parts of Cordoba and Antioquia, protected by a small group of men. However, his being on the run ended on October 23rd.
The aftermath
The Urabeños have a particular organizational structure that enables them to quickly spread their presence throughout the Colombian territory and to continue operations when one of its leaders is arrested or killed, and when some of their cells are neutralized. As explained by InsightCrime, such a structure relies on blocs that receive direct orders from the cartel’s leadership, they retain specific territories and have internal lines of command. Some of them are also in charge of smaller substructures.
Additionally, Urabeños also rely on franchises, mostly local gangs that have no formal links to the cartel nor its chain of command, as they are simply sub-contracted to operate for them, in their name. It is not very different from what Isis does with terror cells throughout the world that perpetrate attacks in their name, but that are not structurally integrated into the organization. As indicated by InsightCrime, this is a win-win situation for both sides. “For Urabeños this strategy opens doors to criminal income, hitmen and a greater territorial presence, even if indirectly. For smaller gangs, the Urabeños represent an important ally to help them establish local dominance and to overcome rivals”.
It is very unlikely that the arrest of “Otoniel” will have a strong impact on the cartel’s narco-trafficking activity, not only due to the organization’s already cited flexible structure but also because there are several deputy leaders ready to take Usaga’s place. Among them, the two with more chances seem to be Wilmer Giraldo “Siopas”, indicated as second in command of the Urabeños and in charge of the southwestern part of Antioquia; Jobanis de Jesús Ávila “Chiquito Malo”, in charge of cocaine production and exportation. However, José Gonzalo Sánchez, alias “Gonzalito”, and Orozman Osten Blanco “Flechas” are two other possible candidates.
There is also a possibility that the cartel will break down into different factions looking for control of narcotrafficking, but that would more likely be a short-term option since it would negatively impact the cartel’s trafficking activity in the medium-long term, something that the Urabeños want to avoid at all costs, considering that narco-business is thriving.
Nicolò scremin, a non-resident fellow of Program on Extremism with the George Washington University and vast experience in the field of counter-terrorism, talks about his personal and professional experience regarding the counter-terrorism panorama.
DISCLAIMER: this is not a promotional video. ITSS Verona does not promote any specific organisation and is apolitical. The content of this video is purely of informative nature and aims to sparks constructive debate.
Interviewers: Francesco Bruno and Adelaide Martelli.
In order to intercept and strike isolated enemy forces, to organise ambushes to naval convoys, and, in general, to obtain naval supremacy, Navies around the world had to rely on air surveillance: until now maritime surveillance has always been dependent on the use of submarines. Not anymore.
In the recent decades a significant contribution to maritime surveillance has come from the use of UUVs (Unmanned Underwater Vehicles). Although they are less familiar in comparison to their Aerial counterparts and they operate in a different environment, the technology underlying both systems is similar. Underwater drones can be divided in two main categories: the remotely operated underwater vehicles (ROUVs) and the Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs). While the former have a long history of widespread use in deep-sea exploration and underwater wrecks investigations, the second ones have been developed for research purposes.
Despite that, AUVs military development and employment outbroke only in the last years in newspapers columns and news, creating an aura of mystery surrounding AUVs. This happened due to two factors. First, many AUVs are still in a semi-prototype phase of development. Secondly, they are used also in ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) operations. Not surprisingly, their use becomes public only when fishermen boats accidentally discover one of them.
Current use of UUVs
The major and well-known theatre of use of AUVs is the contested South China Sea. Not coincidentally, their employment in the region escalated since 2016, when the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague refused China’s claim over the SCS. Although AUVs are unmarked, Indonesia, Philippines, Australia and Taiwan have warned the US about the use of Chinese AUVs, discovered close to their coasts by fishermen or coast guards.
Politically, the AUVs have become a tool to raise the tension in the Area. For instance, the seizure of an American AUV by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) in 2016 has been announced in response to Trump's call with the Taiwanese leader Tsai Ing-wen. The same happened in April 2021, with the allegation that a Boeing manufactured AUV was spying on Chinese coasts. Moreover, the use of UUVs raised a legal debate, due to the lack of a political framework on the use of unmanned systems underwater: they defy the laws and customs of the Law of the Sea, and will continue to do so without proper international regulation.
All these factors plus the technological advance will contribute to the massive use of UUVs in the future not only in South-East Asia, but also in other parts of the world, for instance in the Mediterranean: Turkey has developed a Stingray-shaped drone that can be used for surveillance or it can carry explosives to blow up a ship. Nevertheless, a major threat that concerns US NATO partners is the development of the Russian AUV “Poseidon”, a nuclear propelled torpedo able to carry a nuclear warhead that can be launched by submarines.
With the development of the UUVs, we are heading towards a new era, as happened before with the development of the UAVs, the ever greater potential of these devices will completely change our perception of the war. In addition, given their low cost, they will create more competition and difficulties among the countries, allowing countries less technologically advanced as the West to obtain the means to counter Western naval supremacy.
For its second event of the 2021/22 Webinar Series, ITSS Verona members Martina Gambacorta, John Devine and Omri Brinner discuss Middle Eastern security with award winning journalist and political analyst Waqar Rizvi. In this truly interactive event, our chair and members explore particular dynamics pertaining to the three big players in the region, that is, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Iran.
For its first event of the 2021/22 Webinars Series, Dr Vinicius de Carvalho (KCL), Cristina Carvalho Pacheco (Paraíba State University), and Ana Carla Fonseca (Garimpo de Soluções) analyse how Brazil sees international security, cooperation, diplomacy, and competition, with a particular reference to US-China.