STOCKHOLM — A new report published by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) warns that the increasing use of civilian technology in military and security equipment is blurring traditional distinctions and creating new pathways for misuse, calling for updated export controls and mandatory human rights due diligence.
The paper, “The Militarization of Technology: Preventing Diversion and Misuse Through Export Controls,” examines how the deployment of systems and software originally developed for commercial applications—such as cloud computing, artificial intelligence (AI), and semiconductors—are being rapidly integrated into the defense sector. These processes are leading to the creation of new “dual-use items,” which can serve both civilian and military functions.
“The militarization of technology is a broad term that is used to refer to a range of interlinked processes that are eroding traditional distinctions between the ways in which civilian technologies and military and security equipment are produced and used,” said Dr. Mark Bromley, director of the SIPRI Dual-Use and Arms Trade Control Programme and a co-author of the paper.
Facial Recognition as Key Example
Facial Recognition Technologies (FRTs), which largely originated in the civilian sector for applications like unlocking smartphones and online banking, serve as a primary example of this shift. Militaries are now working to integrate FRTs into uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs) for reconnaissance and intelligence operations, and for potential targeting.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces, for instance, have made extensive use of FRTs to identify deceased Russian soldiers and support military operations. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have also deployed facial recognition in the occupied Palestinian territories and significantly expanded its use in Gaza for identification in crowds and drone footage.
These applications carry significant risks, including the potential for false positives due to biases in AI systems, which raises concerns about violations of international human rights law (IHRL) and international humanitarian law (IHL).
“The misuse of FRTs has raised a number of concerns, especially among civil society and non-governmental organizations, that this could lead to violations of human rights and IHL,” the report notes.
Export Control Limitations
The paper assesses the role of export controls—policy tools used by states to regulate the trade of military and dual-use items—in mitigating these risks. While some FRTs are covered by existing national export controls, there are currently no specific controls on FRTs in the multilateral Wassenaar Arrangement.
SIPRI researchers found that states are often unwilling to regulate technologies that are widely used in commercially available civilian systems, like FRTs, for fear of disrupting legitimate trade. Furthermore, the complexity of regulating non-physical transfers, such as software provided via cloud computing, adds a layer of difficulty to implementation.
“To fully address risks of misuse and diversion, export controls will need to be complemented by other soft-law instruments, such as requiring companies to embed human rights due diligence processes in the conduct of their business,” the paper concludes.
The authors recommend that states clarify and potentially expand their export controls to capture certain FRT transfers and condition military-related R&D funding on compliance requirements, including Internal Compliance Programmes (ICPs) and human rights due diligence.
