Showing posts with label future of war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label future of war. Show all posts

Monday, October 11, 2021

PARADOX

Paradox Gouache and watercolour on paper 56 x76 cm 2021



THE DEAD PRUSSIAN PODCAST
Before I write about Paradox - an alert! 

Yesterday my interview with Mick Cook from the Dead Prussian Podcast went live. We discuss my work, research, creative practice and the future of war. You can listen to my interview HERE  I am thrilled to be given opportunities like this! 

You can see the list of other great interviews on The Dead Prussian Podcast site. I have listened to quite a few, and they are always interesting, with a diverse number of topics and interviewees. 

The term 'Dead Prussian' refers to nineteenth century General Carl von Clausewitz, who wrote the famous tome On War. Regular readers will know that I reference Clausewitz in my Theatre of War series of paintings. Clausewitz uses the term 'theatre of war' variously and often in On War.


THE STORY OF PARADOX
Paradox is the result of a commission from Group Captain Jo Brick, Royal Australian Air Force. We met when I exhibited paintings at the Australian Defence College in Canberra. Group Capt Brick had written an essay "Kill the Enemy, and Don't Forget to Buy Milk on the Way Home" which had won 'Category 2: ADF Officers' section of the Jamie Cullens Defence Leadership and Ethics Essay Competition in 2019. We discussed that I would respond to the essay. Given that the essay is a reflection on the operation of airborne drones, regular readers will know this commission was right up my alley!

Group Capt Brick's thoughtful and hard hitting essay stimulated four paintings - all works on paper. Paradox is the painting she chose. I am delighted!

Below is my artist's statement, written to accompany Paradox

PARADOX

Gouache & Watercolour on Paper 2021

Artist’s Statement: Kathryn Brimblecombe-Fox

Paradox was inspired by Group Captain Jo Brick’s essay “Kill the Enemy, and Don’t Forget to Buy Milk on the Way Home”. The painting evokes the sense of liminality experienced by remote drone pilots who fight wars and insurgencies in distant countries from inside home-based ground control stations. While inside these bunkers they are at war. Upon leaving the bunker, they re-enter domestic life. As Brick notes “their psychological existence occupies both war and peace”. The ongoing rhythm of this existence creates a liminal zone where the pilot’s psyche grapples with seemingly unreconcilable paradoxes. This agitation is deepened by experiences of witnessing, perpetrating and perpetuating scopic intimacies of surveillance, identification, targeting and killing.

The circles in Paradox link and overlap in ways that draw the drone pilot, the drone, and the surveilled or targeted, together. This occurs against a vast sky, or could it be a seascape? This depends on the viewer’s perspective. A sense of flying, hovering, floating is suggested. Are you a pilot, maybe a drone, a bird or even an intergalactic space traveler passing by Earth? Perhaps you are a target, living a precarious life on the edge of life and death? A melancholic kind of resignation is felt as clouds semi-obscure details. These clouds act as visual metaphors for liminality. They also act as metaphors for the contemporary ‘cloud’ of networked, interconnected and interoperable militarised and militarise-able technologies. This techno-cloud is the drone pilot’s operational space. The colour red disrupts melancholia with warnings of violence. The red squares denote computer screens, ‘windows’ into the scoped lives of the targeted. The red tinged clouds speak to violence, blood and death; reminding us of corporeality in a techno-world. The human-like outline indicates the presence of a human in the loop, but can we be sure of this? It may be a robot.


Cheers,
Kathryn

Tuesday, July 09, 2019

WARFIGHTER - 01010111 01000001 01010010 01000110 01001001 01000111 01001000 01010100 01000101 01010010



 WARFIGHTER Gouache on paper 15 x 21 cm 2019


_________________________________________________________



A few questions that keep me thinking are:

What happens when the warfighter is no longer human/alive?

Why has the word 'warfighter' replaced, in many instances, descriptors such as soldier, sailor, pilot? 

Is the increasing use of the word warfighter a sign that the replacement of the human being is already underway? I ask this because nonhuman devices can also be called warfighters eg: unmanned systems such as airborne, land-based and sea-based drones or robots. 

If or when the warfighter is no longer human/alive, does war become a battle between autonomous devices and systems? Will human beings still have control, or will they be held hostage to a type of war beyond our current comprehension?

If your nation's warfighters are no longer human/alive, are the enemy's warfighters also no longer human/alive? If not, is the human being's role relegated to that of victim only?

In a war fought between machines and systems what happens to sovereignty and territory? 

In a war fought between machines and systems what happens to notions such as bravery, courage, loss, victory, disgust, sacrifice and more?

How do we memorialise when the warfighter is no longer human/alive? Will memorial cease to exist as a form of human remembrance? If not, where does that place human history?

If autonomous nonhuman warfighters' initial programming is aimed at fighting, battle, deception and strategy, what happens to peace?

Are cyber systems and robots designed for civilian use, vulnerable to hijacking by the warfighting systems and robots? I assume so - then all systems are potentially militarised. Something to think about in an increasingly interconnected and networked world! 

The artificial intelligence, Alpha Go, plays the ancient game of Go with what is described as superhuman abilities, employing new manoeuvres that human beings have never thought of. This prompts the question, will self learning AI operated warfighters develop unheard of war strategies?  If so, what will war become? Will war become not superhuman, but 'other than' human?  Will human beings have any hope of understanding war once it becomes 'other than human'? Here, I protest against terms such as 'superhuman' and 'more than human', because they imply that that the human is already 'less than' the machine/system. However, if we see these systems as 'other than', rather than 'superhuman' or 'more than human', maybe critical spaces for deeper reflection on the future of war and humanity are revealed?


WARFIGHTER 
In WARFIGHTER [above] I have painted a string of binary code 'instructing' WARFIGHTER. The code seems to form a landscape element, a contour or horizon. The warfighter here is a digital system, a non-human, normally invisible combatant. Is the painting a depiction of a future warscape, one where human beings no longer exist, but the autonomous warfighting systems they developed still do? Maybe this could be a memorial to an algorithm! Is it Earth though? Maybe it is a cosmic landscape, or a virtual landscape - a simulation - Earth's remnant, an algorithm.

WARFIGHTER is similar to my earlier small painting Coded Landscape [below]. Here, the binary code 'instructs' the word LIFE. In my 2015 post, where I discuss Coded Landscape, I write about landscape. Landscape emerged out of the Big Bang and continues today on a universal scale. Here on Earth we have our physical landscape, but also our virtual landscapes. Both Coded Landscape and WARFIGHTER play with depictions of various landscapes - universal, cosmic, physical, virtual, simulated, future. Like WARFIGHTER, Coded Landscape could be a memorial too - to life.

And, there are a lot more questions....for another time.


                                     Coded Landscape Gouache on paper 15 x 21 cm 2015


Cheers,
Kathryn





Sunday, March 10, 2019

PAY ATTENTION: THE DRONES ARE HERE

 Pay Attention: The Drones Are Here Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2019


AUSTRALIA AND DRONES
Australia is playing an increasingly active part in the development and procurement of airborne drones for military and associated purposes. Airborne drones are used for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance [ISR] purposes, with certain types of drones also capable of carrying weapon payloads.

Examples are::

*MQ 9B Sky Guardian drones have been chosen in favour of MQ 9 Reaper Drones. You can read about this decision HERE in Flight Global. These drones are weaponisable. For background on this decision please check out HERE in an Australian Financial Review article , and HERE is a Defense News: Asia Pacific article.

Triton surveillance drones are also on order. You can read about this news on the Australian Airforce website HERE

And, another drone will be manufactured here in Australia in partnership with Boeing. Currently called the "Loyal Wingman" project, you can read about it on the ABC News site HERE. And, an announcement on the current Defence Minister, Christopher Pyne's website HERE. And, on Boeing's website HERE

Australian defence forces have used surveillance drones for some time. For example the Scan Eagle drone has been used in Iraq and Afghanistan. You can read a 2007 article about the Scan Eagle drone HERE at Defence News. You can also read about a Scan Eagle drone now in the Australian War Memorial's collection HERE

* Updated Dec 3, 2019

 Not Waiting For The Future Gouache on paper 56 x 76 cm 2018


QUESTIONS
As Australia becomes more involved in militarised drone operations, procurement and developments, questions that are already being debated globally need to be debated here too. For example, questions about remote operations - surveillance, targeting and killing. The use of unmanned aircraft with sophisticated ISR capabilities, and possible weapon payloads, raises questions about asymmetric warfare. Increasingly autonomous systems employing machine learning and AI raise questions, for example, about human-in-the-loop decision making and the ethics of machine killing. The contemporary 'warfighter' could be a human being, but also an [semi] autonomous  machine. 

The appropriation of technological infrastructure and systems for surveillance and targeting purposes raises questions about the neutrality, or not, of contemporary interconnected technologies. What part does interconnected technology play in preemptive activities? The increasingly blurred lines between military, security and policing activities raise questions about the nature of  contemporary warfare, and its battle fields and spaces. The accelerating nature of technological development stimulates questions about the future of war, and the future of humanity. Are we in a new arms race? Questions about the role of science and technology come to mind. As do questions about legal and ethical frameworks that can be applied to accelerating developments. The speed of technological operation raises further questions that feed into debates about asymmetric war, human involvement, networked systems, social vulnerability, geopolitics, and more...and more.

Since 2015 I have been thinking about these types of questions. I have also undertaken formal research, completing an M. Phil [University of Queensland] that included research into contemporary militarised technology, particularly airborne drones.  

FIVE PAINTINGS
In this post I have included five paintings that reflect upon Australia and airborne drones. 

Pay Attention: The Drones Are Here [top] is my newest painting. An armed drone is pointed towards an upside-down Australia. Is the drone a new arrival, soon to join its Australian fleet? Maybe it is an Australian drone, maybe not. Australia is upside down on purpose, actually a few purposes! The small squares give the impression of pixels. Is the image a simulation? Are you another drone gazing down upon the scene? Is the painting a screen shot? Or, are you a human engaging your imagination in a way that turns human surveillance back onto the drone? Regular readers will recognise the cosmic perspective I love to use here - like in the other four paintings too. Lots of interesting questions and scenarios!

I'll leave you to ponder now. 

Cheers, Kathryn

 Aeropolitics Imagined Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016


 What If? Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016


Hot Spots Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016

Tuesday, September 18, 2018

NOT WAITING FOR THE FUTURE

Not Waiting for the Future Gouache on paper 56 x 76 cm 2018


SPEED AND ACCELERATION
With accelerating developments in technology, including militarised or militarise-able technology, the future seems to be hurtling towards us. This is happening at the same time as technology's operative speeds are also accelerating. Here, for example, think about near-lightspeed transmission or processing of data via networked, always on, systems. How do human beings, living in human dimensions of space and time, keep up with accelerating developments and processes that 'play' in dimensions of space and time that are beyond our sentient or experiential reach? 

One domain that is attempting to keep up is the military. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Surely, in attempting to keep up, the military is absorbed into the processes of speed and acceleration. Arguably, this is an ingredient for an arms race - the word 'race' indicating speed! But, if a nation's defence forces do not address the acceleration in technological development, and speeds of technological operation, their duty of care to defend their citizens and allies could be compromised. 

LETHAL AUTONOMOUS WEAPON SYSTEMS
Discussions and debates about the use and development of lethal autonomous weapon systems [LAWS] have been taking place each year at the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons [UNCCW] since 2013. LAWS are weapons or weapon systems, utilising machine learning and artificial intelligence, that enable various levels of management by the system/weapon itself. UNCCW Meetings have occurred in April and August this year - 2018. Debates about what meaningful human control means, preemptive bans on LAWS development, LAWS and International Human Rights Law, and more, have been discussed. 

But, the worry is that these debates and discussions, occurring in human dimensions of space and time, cannot keep up with the actual speed of LAWS development. The Future of Life Institute in its report on the April 2018 UNCCW meeting commented, The UN CCW is slated to resume discussions in August 2018, however, given the speed with which autonomous weaponry is advancing, many advocates worry that they are moving too slowly.

ACCELERATED WARFARE
The Australian Chief of the Army, Lieutenant General Rick Burr, recently released a "Futures Statement" titled Accelerated Warfare. This statement briefly outlines the Army's response to issues posed by the future of war; a future where technology offers new ways of warfighting, new types of warfighters, as well as new dimensions/terrains in which warfighting will occur. The complexity of war, dispersed across multiple domains and capabilities, now and into the future, enhances the challenges faced by the military, and society more broadly. 

As speed and complexity combine, contemporary and future warfare, also presents potential heightened risk in an age where research into existential risk posed by emerging technologies warns of potential civilisation collapse or human species demise. * 

NOT WAITING FOR THE FUTURE
The Chief of the Army made a statement in his 2018 Futures Statement: Accelerated Warfare that sparked my imagination. He wrote, We must pull the future towards us rather than wait for it; My painting Not Waiting for the Future was inspired/provoked by Lt Gen Burr's statement. I have previously written that rhetoric surrounding the 'future of war' militarises the future. Certainly, the future is a dimension already inhabited by anxiety, if not strategy. 
In Not Waiting for the Future I have flipped the continent of Australia to indicate a kind of flipping of time. A satellite and an airborne drone occupy the sky/space, along with an array of signals. A cross-hair target is positioned over central Australia. Red and white dots appear to perforate the continent, perhaps indicating invasive signals, or the presence of other targeting devices. Or are they indicators of Australian defence systems aimed in all directions? 
Two strings of binary code 'instruct' the words FUTURE and LIFE. The unseen and invisible forces of contemporary life and warfare - code and signals - propel us into a future that we, perhaps, don't need to wait for!
This painting is another of my droned landscapes or militarised landscapes. It is also a cosmic landscape that propels the viewer to perspectives beyond the immediate. With cosmic perspectives the occupation of land, sky and space, by signals that enable the operation of militarised or militarise-able technology becomes apparent. Is this a future-scape? If so, is this a future we really want? 
But, what if this future has already arrived?

________________________________________________


* If you are interested in research into catastrophic risk posed by emerging technologies, please start here, at the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk, The University of Cambridge. 

Cheers,
Kathryn

Thursday, February 23, 2017

DIORAMA - THE FUTURE

Diorama - The Future? Gouache and watercolour on paper 56 x 76 cm 2017



Please check out the interview The Centre for the Study of the Drone, Bard College, New York conducted with me about my dronescapes Portfolio: Dronescapes by Kathryn Brimblecombe-Fox .
I am also thrilled that a research centre such as the Centre for the Study of the Drone believes my work has something meaningful to contribute to current debates and conversations about drone technology.

I also want to report that my reading at Wild Readings earlier this week went very well. I read short paragraphs about three of my recent paintings, New Sky, Combat Proven, Long Range, Long Dwell and Through the Mists of Time. I then read a slam drone poem I have written. 

(Below) Here's a photo of me reading. The painting you can see is Through the Mists of Time.







DIORAMA - THE FUTURE
Diorama - The Future? is not unlike two earlier and smaller works on paper Fragmented and The Tree-of-Life Sends its Energy Underground

The patches of red in Diorama - The Future? can indicate a few things - blood lost, life's fertility, energy lost, or maybe energy dispersed for later retrieval. These red patches act as landscape elements too, albeit possibly cosmic landscape ones. They could be mineral deposits, contour indicators, pools of energy, multiple glimpses of sunsets, bomb blasts on distant and close horizons....

The oscillation between positive and negative interpretations is deliberate. It reflects the ambiguity of orientation in the painting. Is the viewer above the landscape or are they looking down upon a landscape, or are they in front of one or maybe behind? This sense of flying around the landscape, and importantly the Reaper drone, forecloses any priority that might be given to the drone's so called 'vision'. 

The viewer's orientation is disturbed by the upright and upside-down trees-of-life, the two white ones and the row of yellow ones. The white trees act as illuminating beacons. But, the drone is also white? Ah ha! Its failed attempt to camouflage itself is revealed! The emanating rays that appear on the top left look like the rays of a sun - but - they could be the scoping signals of a drone. They contrast with the upside down white tree with its emanating branches that reveal a more complex array of networks and systems than those signaled by the emanating drone rays. Again, perhaps an attempt to camouflage a drone's intrusive surveillance and possible targeting capabilities is revealed. 

EYE IN THE SKY
By playing with orientation and ambiguous perspective the viewer becomes the 'eye in the sky' even if its in your mind's eye - imagination. Given the title of the painting Diorama - The Future? maybe the viewer is transported to the future - in imagination? Given that developments in militarised technology, such as increasingly autonomous systems, are already focused on perceived future of war needs, thinking critically about how the future might unfold is important. In some ways it is already militarised and in some minds so is imagination!

Rather than the word 'vision' to describe a drone's surveillance and targeting capabilities, I prefer the word 'scoping'. This removes the questionable habit we humans have of anthropomorphising non-human and non-living things. Scoping is a more technical term- related to targeting and surveillance. Vision, however, implies a lot more that we humans need to retain for ourselves, particularly imagination - our mind's eye!

Cheers,
Kathryn
www.kathrynbrimblecombe-fox.com 
 P.S please take a look at my new DRONESCAPES page.