The Ethical Quagmire of Weaponizing Animals and Birds in Modern Warfare

#1 · 26th July 2024, 6:22 am

Quote from strafasia on 26th July 2024, 6:22 am
Historically, animals and birds have played pivotal role in varying capacities for conduct of warfare. Horses and camels have been used as cavalry for rapid mobility – outflanking and outrunning enemy in battlefield. Elephants have been used as formidable war animals, particularly in South Asian and African battlefields. The size and strength of elephants played crucial role for demoralizing and causing chaos among enemy ranks. Donkeys and mules have been widely employed for carrying supplies and weapons. Dogs have been extensively used for their keen senses in roles ranging from sentries to detection. Birds, primarily pigeons and eagles, have also been globally employed for delivering messages. The time-tested efficiency of animals and birds in combat not only represent their natural military potential but also symbolizes the bond shared between animals and humanity. In sum, the animal kingdom has been conscripted into human conflict and historic battles cannot be imagined without acknowledging its crucial role.
Industrialization and technological developments have significantly reduced the dependency of military forces on animals and birds. Instead of horses and camels, armored and motorized vehicles are now used as standard mode of mobility. Wireless communication has replaced pigeons, and tanks dominate the land-warfare instead of elephants. Despite all these innovations, animals and birds are still being crudely used for several military applications in-order to bypass or deceive enemy’s sensors and defenses.
In World Wars, when radios and telephonic communication had become standard mode of communication in military, pigeons were still used to deliver encrypted messages. In fact, pigeons demonstrated remarkable reliability in communication, with a 95% success rate in WW-I and continued use in WW-II. During Cold War, birds proved their versatility when ravens and owls - equipped with cameras and microphones - were used for espionage and other covert missions by the American and Soviet spies.
The battlefield of the 21st century is dominated by high-tech combat systems. While the traditional reliance on animals for communication and espionage has proven relatively effective, the modern era has re-introduced a new and innovative, yet controversial, uses for animals in warfare. While human operated drones and semi-autonomous systems dominate headlines, the allure of animal spies persists. Stories like the Pentagon's reported brain implants for sharks, CIA's "Acoustic Kitty" project, Egypt's use of chemical-treated dogs in the Yom Kippur War, and the "spy squirrels" detained in Iran highlight a fascinating, but ethically murky, trend. Horses and mules are still used for logistics in tough mountainous terrain by modern military forces.
Perhaps the most remarkable examples are found in aquatic warfare, where dolphins have emerged as valuable assets. With their exceptional echolocation and memory, dolphins have been harnessed by the U.S. to detect underwater submarines. Their capabilities surpass those of machines, particularly in mine detection. The use of dolphins for harbor protection against hostile special forces was even employed by Russia and Ukraine in their 2014 conflict, highlighting the ongoing relevance of animal spies in modern warfare.
Similarly, birds with their natural camouflage and ability to navigate complex terrain, offer unparalleled aerial reconnaissance potential. Instances like the 2011 discovery of a griffon vulture equipped with Israeli tracking devices in Saudi Arabia and the 2012 recovery of a European bee-eater bearing an Israeli leg band in Turkey highlight the growing interest in avian espionage.
The employment of animals and birds in modern warfare appears to provide crude yet innovative applications. However, by exploiting animals' innate talents for military advantage, we inevitably invite a moral reckoning, compelling us to scrutinize the ethical consequences of our actions. As the line between duty and compassion blurs, we must critically examine the moral and legal consequences of exploiting animals for military purposes.
The disturbing trend of using animals as war machines by terrorist organizations poses a security threat as well as ethical and legal challenge. Unlike professional military forces, terrorist factions are neither governed by well-defined set of rules nor bound to any legislative framework. Insurgent groups have consistently demonstrated their willingness to exploit animals for their destructive purposes, often leveraging their unique capabilities to evade detection and inflict harm. In recent years, terrorist organizations have utilized pigeons as a low-tech method of communication, evading electronic surveillance and exploiting the birds' ability to fly undetected. Moreover, there is a risk that terrorists could infect animals with contagious diseases or pathogens, releasing them in densely populated areas to disrupt public health systems and spread fear.
The utilization of animals as weapons by Violent Non-State Actors (VNSAs) is a longstanding tactic, with a history dating back to the 1980s. The Nicaraguan Contras' deployment of "Bat Bombs," and insurgents in Iraq's use of explosive-laden donkeys in 2005 demonstrate the crude adoption of this strategy. These organic improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were designed to inflict harm and instill fear, showcasing the tactical innovation of VNSAs. The persistence of this tactic is evident in ISIS's employment of "Bird Bombs" in 2014 and Houthi rebels' use of bird-disguised drones in 2019, highlighting the evolution of this strategy. The adaptation of animal-borne IEDs to drone technology demonstrates VNSAs' ability to innovate and exploit vulnerabilities.
The exploitation of animals as war machines not only perpetuates a cycle of violence but also raises profound ethical concerns. The use of animals in warfare can shape public perception of the military and potentially erode public trust. Moreover, it raises questions about the values a society holds when it is willing to sacrifice the welfare of other living beings for military objectives. The suffering inflicted on innocent animals, the potential for widespread harm, and the erosion of humanity's moral fabric all demands our attention.
In the midst of war, the unspoken bond between humans and animals carries the heavy burden of sacrifice, prompting us to question where duty ends and compassion begins. Despite the significance of this issue, there is currently no dedicated legislation governing the use of animals in warfare. While the Geneva Conventions regulate the conduct of armed conflict and seek to minimize unnecessary suffering and harm to all parties involved, including animals, the use of animals as war machines poses a unique legislative challenge. Specifically, balancing military requirements with ethical and moral obligations demands careful consideration of the ethical and legal implications, as stipulated in Geneva Article 51(2) of Additional Protocol. This protocol prohibits targeting animals unless they constitute military objectives. Striking a balance between operational effectiveness and moral responsibility is crucial in this context.
In the near future, we can anticipate a significant convergence of animals and technology, revolutionizing various industries. The emergence of insect cyborgs, equipped with advanced cameras and sensors, will transform urban monitoring and search and rescue operations. The development of neural interface systems for animals will enable brain-computer interfaces for military applications, while bio-hybrid robotics will harness living tissues to power insect-inspired robots. Gene editing technologies like CRISPR will enhance the physical and cognitive abilities of military dogs, and fish mimicry robots will revolutionize underwater exploration and marine research.
As this fusion of biotechnology and engineering advances, we can expect innovative applications across diverse fields, transforming the landscape of human-animal-machine interactions and raising important ethical and strategic considerations. Where biotechnology and animal capabilities could redefine warfare, we must confront the profound ethical implications. The silent suffering of these coerced creatures demands a re-evaluation of our moral boundaries. It is imperative to establish stringent regulations to prevent their exploitation, ensuring our pursuit of security does not compromise our humanity. The future of warfare should embrace innovative solutions that respect the integrity of all living beings, balancing security with ethical and legal responsibilities.”

Historically, animals and birds have played pivotal role in varying capacities for conduct of warfare. Horses and camels have been used as cavalry for rapid mobility – outflanking and outrunning enemy in battlefield. Elephants have been used as formidable war animals, particularly in South Asian and African battlefields. The size and strength of elephants played crucial role for demoralizing and causing chaos among enemy ranks. Donkeys and mules have been widely employed for carrying supplies and weapons. Dogs have been extensively used for their keen senses in roles ranging from sentries to detection. Birds, primarily pigeons and eagles, have also been globally employed for delivering messages. The time-tested efficiency of animals and birds in combat not only represent their natural military potential but also symbolizes the bond shared between animals and humanity. In sum, the animal kingdom has been conscripted into human conflict and historic battles cannot be imagined without acknowledging its crucial role.

Industrialization and technological developments have significantly reduced the dependency of military forces on animals and birds. Instead of horses and camels, armored and motorized vehicles are now used as standard mode of mobility. Wireless communication has replaced pigeons, and tanks dominate the land-warfare instead of elephants. Despite all these innovations, animals and birds are still being crudely used for several military applications in-order to bypass or deceive enemy’s sensors and defenses.

In World Wars, when radios and telephonic communication had become standard mode of communication in military, pigeons were still used to deliver encrypted messages. In fact, pigeons demonstrated remarkable reliability in communication, with a 95% success rate in WW-I and continued use in WW-II. During Cold War, birds proved their versatility when ravens and owls - equipped with cameras and microphones - were used for espionage and other covert missions by the American and Soviet spies.

The battlefield of the 21st century is dominated by high-tech combat systems. While the traditional reliance on animals for communication and espionage has proven relatively effective, the modern era has re-introduced a new and innovative, yet controversial, uses for animals in warfare. While human operated drones and semi-autonomous systems dominate headlines, the allure of animal spies persists. Stories like the Pentagon's reported brain implants for sharks, CIA's "Acoustic Kitty" project, Egypt's use of chemical-treated dogs in the Yom Kippur War, and the "spy squirrels" detained in Iran highlight a fascinating, but ethically murky, trend. Horses and mules are still used for logistics in tough mountainous terrain by modern military forces.

Perhaps the most remarkable examples are found in aquatic warfare, where dolphins have emerged as valuable assets. With their exceptional echolocation and memory, dolphins have been harnessed by the U.S. to detect underwater submarines. Their capabilities surpass those of machines, particularly in mine detection. The use of dolphins for harbor protection against hostile special forces was even employed by Russia and Ukraine in their 2014 conflict, highlighting the ongoing relevance of animal spies in modern warfare.

Similarly, birds with their natural camouflage and ability to navigate complex terrain, offer unparalleled aerial reconnaissance potential. Instances like the 2011 discovery of a griffon vulture equipped with Israeli tracking devices in Saudi Arabia and the 2012 recovery of a European bee-eater bearing an Israeli leg band in Turkey highlight the growing interest in avian espionage.

The employment of animals and birds in modern warfare appears to provide crude yet innovative applications. However, by exploiting animals' innate talents for military advantage, we inevitably invite a moral reckoning, compelling us to scrutinize the ethical consequences of our actions. As the line between duty and compassion blurs, we must critically examine the moral and legal consequences of exploiting animals for military purposes.

The disturbing trend of using animals as war machines by terrorist organizations poses a security threat as well as ethical and legal challenge. Unlike professional military forces, terrorist factions are neither governed by well-defined set of rules nor bound to any legislative framework. Insurgent groups have consistently demonstrated their willingness to exploit animals for their destructive purposes, often leveraging their unique capabilities to evade detection and inflict harm. In recent years, terrorist organizations have utilized pigeons as a low-tech method of communication, evading electronic surveillance and exploiting the birds' ability to fly undetected. Moreover, there is a risk that terrorists could infect animals with contagious diseases or pathogens, releasing them in densely populated areas to disrupt public health systems and spread fear.

The utilization of animals as weapons by Violent Non-State Actors (VNSAs) is a longstanding tactic, with a history dating back to the 1980s. The Nicaraguan Contras' deployment of "Bat Bombs," and insurgents in Iraq's use of explosive-laden donkeys in 2005 demonstrate the crude adoption of this strategy. These organic improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were designed to inflict harm and instill fear, showcasing the tactical innovation of VNSAs. The persistence of this tactic is evident in ISIS's employment of "Bird Bombs" in 2014 and Houthi rebels' use of bird-disguised drones in 2019, highlighting the evolution of this strategy. The adaptation of animal-borne IEDs to drone technology demonstrates VNSAs' ability to innovate and exploit vulnerabilities.

The exploitation of animals as war machines not only perpetuates a cycle of violence but also raises profound ethical concerns. The use of animals in warfare can shape public perception of the military and potentially erode public trust. Moreover, it raises questions about the values a society holds when it is willing to sacrifice the welfare of other living beings for military objectives. The suffering inflicted on innocent animals, the potential for widespread harm, and the erosion of humanity's moral fabric all demands our attention.

In the midst of war, the unspoken bond between humans and animals carries the heavy burden of sacrifice, prompting us to question where duty ends and compassion begins. Despite the significance of this issue, there is currently no dedicated legislation governing the use of animals in warfare. While the Geneva Conventions regulate the conduct of armed conflict and seek to minimize unnecessary suffering and harm to all parties involved, including animals, the use of animals as war machines poses a unique legislative challenge. Specifically, balancing military requirements with ethical and moral obligations demands careful consideration of the ethical and legal implications, as stipulated in Geneva Article 51(2) of Additional Protocol. This protocol prohibits targeting animals unless they constitute military objectives. Striking a balance between operational effectiveness and moral responsibility is crucial in this context.

In the near future, we can anticipate a significant convergence of animals and technology, revolutionizing various industries. The emergence of insect cyborgs, equipped with advanced cameras and sensors, will transform urban monitoring and search and rescue operations. The development of neural interface systems for animals will enable brain-computer interfaces for military applications, while bio-hybrid robotics will harness living tissues to power insect-inspired robots. Gene editing technologies like CRISPR will enhance the physical and cognitive abilities of military dogs, and fish mimicry robots will revolutionize underwater exploration and marine research.

As this fusion of biotechnology and engineering advances, we can expect innovative applications across diverse fields, transforming the landscape of human-animal-machine interactions and raising important ethical and strategic considerations. Where biotechnology and animal capabilities could redefine warfare, we must confront the profound ethical implications. The silent suffering of these coerced creatures demands a re-evaluation of our moral boundaries. It is imperative to establish stringent regulations to prevent their exploitation, ensuring our pursuit of security does not compromise our humanity. The future of warfare should embrace innovative solutions that respect the integrity of all living beings, balancing security with ethical and legal responsibilities.”