The AI Fighter Jet Forces a Question We Must Answer | Column

Opinion. The AI fighter jet has stopped being science fiction. This month Lockheed Martin said an AI agent flew a modified F-16 through 27 intercepts against a live target. The military calls it progress. I call it a question we have not answered.

The technology is real. The US Air Force VENOM programme has let onboard software take control during portions of flight. A human pilot still sits in the cockpit as backup. That reassurance may not last.

The AI fighter jet needs a clear chain of accountability

An AI fighter jet compresses decisions once made by people. It selects, tracks and engages faster than any human could. Speed is the selling point. Speed is also the danger.

Ask a simple question. When an autonomous system kills the wrong person, who answers? The pilot who monitored it? The engineers who trained it? The commander who deployed it? No treaty gives a clean reply.

Defenders argue that machines remove human error and fatigue. They may reduce some risks. Yet they also remove the pause where conscience lives. A soldier can refuse an unlawful order. Software cannot.

Supporters note that a human still signs off today. That is true, for now. But every step normalises the next. Trust granted for intercepts becomes trust granted for strikes.

I am not calling for a ban on research. I am calling for rules before deployment, not after. Meaningful human control must be defined in law, not left to vendors promises.

Free societies debate weapons in the open. We regulate lethal force with courts, oversight and evidence. Autonomous weapons deserve the scrutiny we brought to earlier arms races. Our reporting on the EU AI Act transparency rules shows democracies can set limits.

The machine will not feel guilt. That is precisely why the humans behind it must.

History offers a warning here. New weapons often outrun the rules meant to govern them. Landmines, cluster bombs and chemical arms all spread before treaties caught up. Each delay cost civilian lives. We should not repeat that mistake with thinking machines. The time to write limits is now, while a human still holds the controls.

Fact basis: Lockheed Martin announcement via Aerotime; US Air Force VENOM programme reporting. This is an opinion column.