Autonomous drones kill humans for the first time in combat

What happened?

An exclusive report by New Scientist, picked up by Slashdot, has revealed that fully autonomous drones, without human intervention in target selection or attack, have killed enemy soldiers for the first time in an armed conflict. Ukrainian drone manufacturer Alexander Kokhanovskyy, founder of the company that supplied the technology, told the publication that the test took place two years ago, during the Ukrainian counteroffensive near the cities of Bakhmut and Chasiv Yar in eastern Ukraine. According to Kokhanovskyy, ten quadcopter drones, dubbed 'Terminators', were deployed, programmed to fly to the front line, cover 3 to 5 kilometers in about 10 minutes, and then activate 'Terminator mode', in which an artificial intelligence model autonomously searched for and intercepted targets. 'There is no connection to the drone, you can't see the video, nothing... Everything it sees will be eliminated,' Kokhanovskyy said. After the mission, human-piloted drones verified the results, confirming several enemy casualties, including 'a couple of soldiers and a truck'. The Ukrainian Defense Ministry did not respond to questions about the test or the current legal position regarding the use of fully autonomous weapons.

Why is it important?

This event marks a turning point in military history, comparable to the first use of unmanned aircraft in combat or the introduction of gunpowder. Until now, lethal drones required human supervision to authorize attacks, following protocols such as the US 'human-centered warfare' or NATO standards. Full autonomy eliminates direct human control in the lethal decision chain, raising serious ethical, legal, and operational dilemmas. The lack of visual recording of the attack (the drones did not transmit video) and the absence of official confirmation from the Ukrainian Defense Ministry leave many questions unanswered, but the statement from a direct actor in the war, backed by the credibility of New Scientist, gives the event significant weight. As military ethics professor Peter Asaro notes in a 2023 Nature article, 'delegating life-and-death decisions to machines erodes human responsibility and may violate international humanitarian law.'

Consequences and context

The use of autonomous weapons has been debated in international forums since 2014, when the UN held the first informal meetings on 'lethal autonomous weapons systems' (LAWS). In 2019, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) urged states to adopt new binding rules to ensure human control over the use of force. However, this incident could accelerate regulation, as it demonstrates that the technology is already operational. The international community, including the UN and the European Union, has expressed concern about the lack of accountability and potential identification errors, especially in dense urban environments like Bakhmut, where civilians and combatants mix. Moreover, it sets a dangerous precedent: if one country uses this technology, others may feel pressured to do so, sparking an arms race in military AI. According to a 2024 report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), at least 15 countries are developing autonomous weapons systems, including the United States, China, Russia, Israel, and South Korea. The Ukrainian test, though limited to a single occasion, shows that the technological barrier has been overcome.

'There is no connection to the drone, you can't see the video, nothing... Everything it sees will be eliminated.' — Alexander Kokhanovskyy, drone manufacturer.

What readers should know

Although the test occurred two years ago, its revelation now underscores that autonomous warfare is already a reality, not a future possibility. There is no evidence it has been used widely, but the mere fact that it has been successfully tested changes the game. The lack of transparency and the absence of clear legal frameworks make an urgent global debate on the limits of autonomy in lethal systems necessary. As international law professor Marco Sassòli warns in a 2023 article in the International Review of the Red Cross, 'full autonomy in weapons not only raises issues of accountability but may also violate the principles of distinction and proportionality.' Readers should understand that, although the incident has not been officially confirmed, the source is credible and the geopolitical context (the war in Ukraine, the need for rapid innovation) makes the use of these technologies plausible. The international community must act now to establish clear limits before lethal autonomy becomes the norm.