What are the core legal, moral, and ethical principles that transcend technology, and how can Special Operations Forces (SOF) best prepare for the legal, moral, and ethical challenges inherent in new technologies? Legally, what authorities are needed to incorporate new technologies, and what is the obligation to inform the SOF user of potential long-term impacts before use? Morally, are there any potential impacts of novel technologies on human rights, privacy, or environmental sustainability?
These ethical dilemmas are particularly evident in the integration of wearable, edible, or injectable technology for SOF, which raises significant concerns about the loss of autonomy in making ethical decisions. Wearable devices (like fitness trackers) collect vast amounts of personal data, creating a risk that external entities and malicious actors could exploit this data to manipulate individual choices or influence decision-making through targeted persuasive techniques. Furthermore, while edible technologies (like smart pills) and injectables (such as microchips or smart implants) offer valuable health monitoring and cognitive enhancements, there is a distinct risk of overreliance and loss of agency. Can personnel become too dependent on such technologies for managing their health or decision-making processes, inadvertently surrendering their autonomy to technology or the entities controlling it? Risks also include potential unauthorized access to implanted devices, data breaches, or the manipulation of bodily functions, all of which may compromise personal autonomy and privacy.
What are the potential risks or challenges the Special Operations Enterprise (SOE) should consider regarding the loss of SOF ethical autonomy when using wearable technology, edibles, or injectables, and what measures can be taken to ensure individuals maintain their autonomy and ethical decision-making capabilities? Ultimately, how can SOF develop personnel who understand these profound implications, and how can a technology’s potential moral hazards and moral injuries be avoided or mitigated?
- Allison, Capt. Roberta et al, "Integrated Wearable Technology in Rescue," SOS AUAR 25C.
- Answers the questions regarding the risks of wearable devices—such as smartwatches—and the measures needed to mitigate data exploitation. The authors conclude that commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) wearables, like the Garmin Tactix 8, are not a viable option for military personnel in peer-to-peer conflicts due to severe cybersecurity vulnerabilities. COTS wearables rely on commercial databases and mobile operating systems that are highly susceptible to "malware, file stealing," and the aggregation of location data by commercial entities presents a massive risk where external actors could exploit personal information. To ensure security, privacy, and autonomy are maintained, the authors recommend the DoD abandon commercial wearables and instead research, develop, and procure a strictly military-produced wearable device that utilizes secure networks (such as GovCloud) and strict emission control (EMCON) policies.
- Baird, Lt. Col. Michael D., "Implications of Artificial Intelligence into Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Operations," AFGC thesis, 2020.
- Answers the questions regarding how external entities might manipulate individual choices and data to erode autonomy. The paper notes that the proliferation of networked, mobile devices makes vast amounts of collected data readily available for malicious purposes, threatening individual privacy and human rights. External entities and adversaries can manipulate individual choices by introducing false or biased data—systematically feeding disinformation or altering physical inputs to "fool algorithms into making a mistake" and cause systems to incorrectly react to the environment, effectively manipulating the operator's subsequent decisions. To ensure individuals maintain ethical decision-making capabilities, Baird argues that humans must remain "in the loop" or "on the loop" to "function as a moral guide for protecting human dignity and to prevent mistakes" that machines cannot ethically navigate.
- Banez, Col. Justin D., "Evaluating Air Force Special Warfare for the Contested Fight: Kill Chain Advantages as a Stand-in Force," AF Fellows (Institute for Defense Analyses," 2025.
-
Briefly addresses the use of wearable technology specifically within the Special Operations Forces (SOF) community. The author notes that "wearable end-user devices and computers" are actively used by special operators to fuse and relay data for precision strikes, air traffic control, and battlefield trauma care. While this paper establishes the operational reliance on wearables within SOF, it focuses strictly on their tactical advantages in the kill chain and does not directly address the ethical, privacy, or autonomy concerns regarding their use.
- Catt, Capt. Nathaniel, "Calibrating Trust in Military AI Systems," SOS AUAR, 2021.
- Answers the questions regarding the risk of overreliance on advanced technology, the potential loss of agency, and the measures required to ensure individuals maintain their independent decision-making capabilities. The author warns that blindly trusting or over-relying on automated, machine-driven decision-making systems can lead to "misuse and eventually moral deskilling". If personnel become too dependent on these systems, they risk inadvertently surrendering their autonomy and losing the ability to rationally interpret situations on their own. To prevent this loss of agency, Catt recommends that warfighters must maintain their core competencies by "occasionally training without the use of the AI system to make the same decisions". This measure ensures they retain their intrinsic, independent capability to make critical decisions in high-risk environments if the technology is compromised or unavailable.
- Daniels, Jessi K., "Personal and Portable Electronic Devices: Threatening the Protection of National Security," AFGC thesis, 2023.
- This paper addresses the prompt's questions regarding how external entities could manipulate data from wearables and the risks associated with injectables or implants. Daniels analyzes the severe national security risks posed by personal wearables (like smartwatches and fitness trackers) and implantable/injectable medical devices (like insulin pumps and heart monitors). The paper explains that these devices constantly track biometric and health information; if malicious actors exploit vulnerabilities such as hacked Near Field Communication (NFC) or Internet of Things (IoT) connections, they can access vast amounts of personal data. Because Artificial Intelligence (AI) embedded in these devices can learn and process intricate details about a user's life and routines, a single device provides enough data points for adversaries to monitor, exploit, and manipulate military personnel, directly eroding their privacy and autonomy. Furthermore, the paper highlights that hacked medical implants can lead to the unauthorized manipulation of bodily functions, severely compromising a user's physical autonomy.
- Green, Maj. Shawn M., "To Infinity and Beyond: Adopting an Infinite Game mindset toward Space Force Fitness", SAASS thesis, 2021.
- Answers the questions regarding the privacy and operational risks associated with wearable technologies like smartwatches, smart rings, and fitness trackers. The paper highlights that while wearables provide valuable physiological data, they introduce severe operational security (OPSEC) and privacy vulnerabilities, famously demonstrated when Strava heat maps exposed military deployment locations. The author notes that mandatory tracking can induce an "Orwellian paranoia" that leadership is constantly monitoring personal behaviors, which severely invades personal privacy. To mitigate these risks and preserve individual autonomy, the paper recommends policy measures such as only requiring wearables to be active during dedicated physical training, allowing personnel to disable tracking features under privacy settings, and restricting Bluetooth devices in classified workspaces.
- Holloway, Maj. E. Minnenne and Maj. Bridget K. Pantaleon, "Warfare in the Age of AI: Upholding International Humanitarian Law amid Technological Advancements," AF Fellows paper, 2024, 12 pgs.
- Directly answers regarding the risks of external manipulation, overreliance on technology, and measures to safeguard autonomy when using AI-augmented systems. Pantaleon notes that if adversaries use cyber-attacks to hack or manipulate AI systems, they can intentionally skew algorithms and data, leading to miscalculations that cost innocent lives. Addressing the risk of surrendering agency, the paper highlights warnings from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) about operators developing an overreliance on AI-generated analyses, which can lead to unlawful decisions if humans blindly trust the technology without monitoring it. To ensure individuals maintain their ethical decision-making capabilities, Pantaleon argues that the military must enforce a "human-centered approach" requiring strict human oversight. Specifically, measures must be taken to ensure that decision-making remains at "human speed, not machine speed," allowing human operators the time to intervene and provide the contextual, ethical, and legal considerations that AI lacks.
- Iwanenko, Lt. Col. Tanya, "Bridging the Gap: Strategic Leadership at the Intersection of AI, Ethics and the Laws of War," AWC SSP, 2025.
- This paper answers the questions regarding the loss of ethical autonomy when using wearable technology and the measures needed to ensure individuals maintain their decision-making capabilities. Iwanenko examines a study (Lekea et al.) where military personnel used AI-equipped wearable devices that offered real-time ethical guidance during high-stress combat simulations. The paper identifies that the primary risk of using these wearables is an over-reliance on AI, which threatens to diminish critical thinking and cause personnel to surrender their human agency and moral reasoning to a machine. To ensure individuals maintain their autonomy and ethical decision-making capabilities, Iwanenko recommends establishing clearly defined boundaries for machine autonomy where human leaders retain final decision-making authority. Furthermore, the paper advocates for implementing rigorous scenario-based wargames to stress-test leaders under extreme conditions and providing specialized training in "centaur teaming," ensuring humans consistently provide the moral judgment and contextual awareness while relying on AI solely for rapid data processing.
- Parsons, Lt. Col. Kevin, "Using Behavioral Science and Technology to Improve Health in the United States Air Force," AWC SSP, 2021.
- Answers the questions regarding the risks and security challenges of wearable fitness technology. The paper notes that devices like Fitbits and smart rings broadcast precise location data and personal health details over Bluetooth and Wi-Fi, which could potentially be exploited by external entities. To address these vulnerabilities while maintaining personnel agency over their data, the paper recommends that military leadership thoroughly evaluate these security risks and clearly communicate them to the force. Furthermore, the author suggests the military offer a controlled, internally managed alternative program that safeguards personal data against unauthorized access.
- Raudy, Maj. Kristine Anne Laughlin, "Extreme Heat and Military Operations: Evaluating Health Risks and Mitigation Strategies," AFGC thesis, 2025, 60 pgs.
- Raudy strongly advocates for the deployment of wearable biometric sensors (like those developed by the U.S. Army Research Institute) to continuously monitor physiological responses and predict heat stroke. However, she directly addresses the ethical challenges this poses to personnel privacy. She points out the risk that health information is often collected and used without individual consent, creating data vulnerability. Furthermore, she warns that collecting and disclosing this biometric data risks stigmatizing individuals who show physiological vulnerability to heat, which could negatively impact their career progression, deployment status, and retention—potentially discouraging personnel from reporting symptoms altogether.
- Ruiz, Capt. (Chaplain) Daniel, "Using Artificial Intelligence to Aid in the Moral Development of Airmen," SOS AUAR, 2020.
-
Answers the questions regarding the ethical challenges of using injectables or brain implants to influence decision-making. The paper evaluates an "Exhaustive Enhancement" model where biomechanical brain implants could be used to control human behavior and strictly enforce a programmer's moral code. The author warns that this approach is inherently Orwellian, violates personal freedom and autonomy, and raises profound ethical concerns regarding who dictates the moral code and how users can trust such an invasive machine. To ensure individuals maintain their autonomy and ethical decision-making capabilities, the author recommends utilizing "Auxiliary" or "Socratic" enhancements instead, where the technology acts merely as a counselor to foster dialogue or provides customized data for the human to consider, ensuring the human operator retains ultimate decision-making agency.
-
- Binzer, Maj. Hank, "Mitigating Moral Injury: Front-Line Defense against the Increased Risk of Moral Injury in Modern Military Operations," AFGC thesis, 2026, 36 pgs.
- Binzer specifically addresses the moral hazards introduced by remote and indirect forms of warfare, such as remotely piloted aircraft and long-range fires. He notes that while these technologies reduce physical risk, they actually amplify moral responsibility by removing traditional markers of risk, reciprocity, and immediacy. To mitigate the unique moral injuries caused by these technological advancements, Binzer emphasizes that leaders must formally acknowledge the ethical burden placed on operators rather than minimizing it as routine stress. By actively framing these morally ambiguous actions within a coherent moral narrative and creating space for ethical discussion, leaders can prevent operators from internalizing the lethal consequences of their remote actions as personal guilt and shame.
- Casey, Maj. Keith R., "Pandora's Box: The Race to Artificial Intelligence," AF Fellows paper, 2023, 3 pgs.
- Collins, Maj. Graham, "Artificial Intelligence: What Is It and Ethical Implications," ACSC elective paper, 2024, 13 pgs.
- Davis III, Lt. Col. Royal A., et al, "Air Force Cyber Law Primer," Published as an AU Press Perspective on Cyber Power Paper, 2022, 154 pgs.
- Edwards, Capt. William J., "AI's Ethical Skies: Navigating RPA Aircrew Responsibilities," AFGC thesis, 2025.
- Edwards addresses the ethical, legal, and operational challenges of deploying AI-driven systems by focusing on the integration of artificial intelligence into remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) operations. He highlights that while AI enhances speed and precision, it introduces critical risks such as automation bias, algorithmic errors, and accountability gaps that threaten compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL) and the laws of armed conflict. To ensure ethical compliance and maintain accountability, Edwards argues that aircrews must shift from direct controllers to active supervisors and critical evaluators of AI recommendations. Furthermore, he recommends that the DoD proactively adapt to these challenges by establishing explicit Rules of Engagement (ROEs) for AI use, implementing robust "human on the loop" oversight mechanisms like accessible kill-switches, and ensuring that no autonomous weapon is fielded without a clear human chain of command taking responsibility.
- Gardner, Maj. Dennis Jr., "Check Your Understanding: The Ethical Application of Artificial Intelligence," AF Fellows paper, 2023, 3 pgs.
- Holloway, Maj. E. Minnenne and Maj. Bridget K. Pantaleon, "Warfare in the Age of AI: Upholding International Humanitarian Law amid Technological Advancements," AF Fellows paper, 2024, 12 pgs.
- Lennell, Maj. Matthew, "The Warrior and the Over the Horizon Map," GCPME thesis, 2025, 38 pgs.
- Lewczyk, Jonathan A., "Maintaining Human Authority while Utilizing Artificial Intelligence in Commercial Aviation," AF Fellows paper (Georgetown, The Policy Issues of Big Data and Artificial Intelligence), 2023, 9 pgs.
- McFarlane, Maj. Brandon L, "Precision vs. Strategy: Evaluating the Joint Targeting Enterprise's Role in Achieving U.S. Long-Term Objectives," AFGC thesis, 2025, 42 pgs.
- McFarlane explores the profound legal and ethical dilemmas caused by modern precision strike technologies. He notes that the JTE's capabilities have frequently been deployed in legally ambiguous territories, such as stretching the outdated 2001 AUMF to justify drone strikes against ISIS in Syria without a distinct congressional mandate or host-nation consent. Furthermore, he highlights the ethical failure of command structures that executed strikes even when internal collateral damage estimation tools warned of the presence of women and children (e.g., the 2019 Baghuz strike). To resolve these dilemmas and uphold ethical principles, McFarlane recommends establishing a joint interagency legal review board to periodically re-evaluate the legal mandates of ongoing targeting operations. He also recommends appointing independent civilian oversight officers to standardize civilian harm tracking outside of the immediate strike authorization chain of command.