Delphine Ryan
Knowledge Transfer Specialist
CONQUERING HUMAN ERROR.
DEVELOPING COMPETENCE.
The Science Fiction Connection
(This article is a 25-minute read, so for convenience, you can download it as a PDF)
THE SCIENCE FICTION CONNECTION
An alternative look at the enduring role of science fiction
in today's global defence and security
by Delphine Ryan, IEng MRAeS, March 2021
1. INTRODUCTION
With the proliferation of non-military and non-governmental individuals, groups and organisations actively involved in security, defence and space manufacturing and operations, and with the abundant commercialisation of readily available and relatively cheap equipment (which in the past would have been only available to the military), Earth governments of all shapes and sizes are having little choice but to re-evaluate their defence and security strategies in the face of existing and future threats (imaginary or real).
In essence, the global defence and security sectors – which in the past have been almost exclusively within the purview of militaries and governments – are gearing up for a watershed transformation with significant ramifications: a subject matter currently undergoing intensive scrutiny and discussion in academic, military and governmental circles around the world - the United Kingdom being no exception.
For instance, in September 2020, the Royal Aeronautical Society – the world’s oldest aerospace learned society, together with the Royal United Services Institute - the world's oldest independent think tank on international defence and security, jointly hosted the Extreme threats to the UK virtual conference. More recently, in March 2021, the same Institute together with the French Ecole de Guerre hosted another virtual symposium, Winning without victory? Navigating indecisiveness in endless wars. Both these conferences raised similar concerns about the status quo of global defence and security, and furnished a taste of the many conversations taking place.
This paper aims to propound an alternative outlook on the above situation by bringing some light on the enduring role that science fiction continues to play in the defence and security arena together with its real potential to help tackle, for the greater good, some of the existing and future threats which have been identified across the industry, such as:
Moreover, western military power is no longer a given, since other countries around the world have raised their standards and developed their own civilian and military capabilities. In the civilian domain, commercial enterprises and single individuals have easy access to what, in the past, would have been only accessible to the military. Unmanned air vehicles (drones), being one such example.
The Integrated Operating Concept 2025 [1] recently published by the Ministry of Defence, introduces a new approach to the utility of armed forces in an era of persistent competition and a rapidly evolving character of warfare. This new viewpoint represents the most significant change in UK military thought in several generations. The approach acknowledges that the “pervasiveness of information and the pace of technological change are transforming the character of warfare” and that “we need a new model for deterrence that takes account of the need to compete”.
Taking a global view, one could surmise that the UK is not alone in the assumption of this new outlook. It is likely that other nations from East to West and North to South concur with the same observations, or have come to similar conclusions.
Faced with such dramatic changes, one could ponder if all extreme technological threats could be countered by a nuclear deterrent (as in the case of the UK’s submarine nuclear deterrent programme), or if more suitable alternatives exist (such as all nations of the world simply getting on with each other).
Over the years, the concepts of war, defence and security have become somewhat interchangeable yet the meaning of each term is quite different from the other, and each activity does not serve the same purpose. War means neither defence nor security. Defence means neither war nor security. Security means neither war nor defence. But each activity may include elements of the others.
The word war in its meaning of “a state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties; military science”, can be traced back to the Indo-European root wers–,"to confuse, mix up." [2]
On the other hand, defence is defined as “the action of defending from (protect from harm or danger) or resisting attack” and “military measures or resources for protecting a country”. From the Latin dēfendere, “to ward off”. [3]
And lastly, security means “something that gives or assures safety, e.g. measures adopted by a government to prevent espionage, sabotage, or attack.” This word is derived from the Latin securus meaning “without care (as in feeling no apprehension)”.
These three words are evidently not interchangeable since they do not mean the same thing and are not synonymous.
The idea that war and conflict is inevitable in order to defend or secure someone or something is a fallacy. It is possible to defend or to secure without continuing conflict or seeking war. Could it be possible that the achievement of real security and defence for a group or nation be achieved through conflict resolution and cessation rather than conflict creation and perpetuation?
Setting philosophy and semantics aside, the following section briefly outlines some of the extreme technological threats – real or fancied - currently perceived as requiring urgent attention.
2. IDENTIFIED EXISTING AND FUTURE THREATS
2.1 Nuclear weapons and deterrent
As a responsible nuclear weapon state and party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the UK remains committed to the long-term goal of a world without nuclear weapons. [4]
However, since 1969, the Royal Navy has delivered the continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrent in the form of at least one of four nuclear-armed submarines on patrol for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The Vanguard-class submarines which currently accomplish this deterrent will soon be replaced by the new Dreadnought-class submarines which, once entered into service, are intended to last until 2060. As of 2020, the Dreadnought-class procurement programme is the biggest spend in the nation’s defence budget.
Thus, it begs the question: Will nuclear weapons still be relevant in 2060?
From a philosophical perspective, could a weapon which can destroy all life and against which there is no defence, really be classified as a weapon? And if futile against threats such as cyberattacks or anti-satellite weapons, does it still have a place in military arsenals other than for the obliteration of the human race?
With the proliferation of non-military and non-governmental individuals, groups and organisations actively involved in security, defence and space manufacturing and operations, and with the abundant commercialisation of readily available and relatively cheap equipment (which in the past would have been only available to the military), Earth governments of all shapes and sizes are having little choice but to re-evaluate their defence and security strategies in the face of existing and future threats (imaginary or real).
In essence, the global defence and security sectors – which in the past have been almost exclusively within the purview of militaries and governments – are gearing up for a watershed transformation with significant ramifications: a subject matter currently undergoing intensive scrutiny and discussion in academic, military and governmental circles around the world - the United Kingdom being no exception.
For instance, in September 2020, the Royal Aeronautical Society – the world’s oldest aerospace learned society, together with the Royal United Services Institute - the world's oldest independent think tank on international defence and security, jointly hosted the Extreme threats to the UK virtual conference. More recently, in March 2021, the same Institute together with the French Ecole de Guerre hosted another virtual symposium, Winning without victory? Navigating indecisiveness in endless wars. Both these conferences raised similar concerns about the status quo of global defence and security, and furnished a taste of the many conversations taking place.
This paper aims to propound an alternative outlook on the above situation by bringing some light on the enduring role that science fiction continues to play in the defence and security arena together with its real potential to help tackle, for the greater good, some of the existing and future threats which have been identified across the industry, such as:
- Nuclear weapons and deterrent
- Development of hypersonic weapons
- Explosives
- Deliberate misuse of biology
- Threats of precise timing systems
- Cyber security, threats, attacks and deception
- Space weather
- Conflicts in outer space
- Disruptive technologies
Moreover, western military power is no longer a given, since other countries around the world have raised their standards and developed their own civilian and military capabilities. In the civilian domain, commercial enterprises and single individuals have easy access to what, in the past, would have been only accessible to the military. Unmanned air vehicles (drones), being one such example.
The Integrated Operating Concept 2025 [1] recently published by the Ministry of Defence, introduces a new approach to the utility of armed forces in an era of persistent competition and a rapidly evolving character of warfare. This new viewpoint represents the most significant change in UK military thought in several generations. The approach acknowledges that the “pervasiveness of information and the pace of technological change are transforming the character of warfare” and that “we need a new model for deterrence that takes account of the need to compete”.
Taking a global view, one could surmise that the UK is not alone in the assumption of this new outlook. It is likely that other nations from East to West and North to South concur with the same observations, or have come to similar conclusions.
Faced with such dramatic changes, one could ponder if all extreme technological threats could be countered by a nuclear deterrent (as in the case of the UK’s submarine nuclear deterrent programme), or if more suitable alternatives exist (such as all nations of the world simply getting on with each other).
Over the years, the concepts of war, defence and security have become somewhat interchangeable yet the meaning of each term is quite different from the other, and each activity does not serve the same purpose. War means neither defence nor security. Defence means neither war nor security. Security means neither war nor defence. But each activity may include elements of the others.
The word war in its meaning of “a state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties; military science”, can be traced back to the Indo-European root wers–,"to confuse, mix up." [2]
On the other hand, defence is defined as “the action of defending from (protect from harm or danger) or resisting attack” and “military measures or resources for protecting a country”. From the Latin dēfendere, “to ward off”. [3]
And lastly, security means “something that gives or assures safety, e.g. measures adopted by a government to prevent espionage, sabotage, or attack.” This word is derived from the Latin securus meaning “without care (as in feeling no apprehension)”.
These three words are evidently not interchangeable since they do not mean the same thing and are not synonymous.
The idea that war and conflict is inevitable in order to defend or secure someone or something is a fallacy. It is possible to defend or to secure without continuing conflict or seeking war. Could it be possible that the achievement of real security and defence for a group or nation be achieved through conflict resolution and cessation rather than conflict creation and perpetuation?
Setting philosophy and semantics aside, the following section briefly outlines some of the extreme technological threats – real or fancied - currently perceived as requiring urgent attention.
2. IDENTIFIED EXISTING AND FUTURE THREATS
2.1 Nuclear weapons and deterrent
As a responsible nuclear weapon state and party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the UK remains committed to the long-term goal of a world without nuclear weapons. [4]
However, since 1969, the Royal Navy has delivered the continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrent in the form of at least one of four nuclear-armed submarines on patrol for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The Vanguard-class submarines which currently accomplish this deterrent will soon be replaced by the new Dreadnought-class submarines which, once entered into service, are intended to last until 2060. As of 2020, the Dreadnought-class procurement programme is the biggest spend in the nation’s defence budget.
Thus, it begs the question: Will nuclear weapons still be relevant in 2060?
From a philosophical perspective, could a weapon which can destroy all life and against which there is no defence, really be classified as a weapon? And if futile against threats such as cyberattacks or anti-satellite weapons, does it still have a place in military arsenals other than for the obliteration of the human race?
What would a world where every nation has nuclear weapons look like? Conversely, in the next 40 years could all nations have got together and settled their differences thus dispensing with the fancied need for nuclear weapons? (Now we enter the realm of Star Trek – all Earth nations getting along with each other).
The works of renowned American scientist, Carl Sagan, on the catastrophic consequences of nuclear war on humans and the planet brought home the fact that nuclear weapons cannot possibly be a solution for a civilisation which seeks to flourish and prosper, as it could never do so under the perpetual shadow of this annihilating technology.
In fact, a most apt analogy would be that of the Death Star in the Star Wars universe. The Death Star is constructed as the ultimate weapon and cannot be fought against despite readily available advanced technologies by those who would oppose it. It instils a permanent veil of fear across the various worlds and is used as the ultimate planet destroyer. The atomic, and the more powerful hydrogen bomb, also fit this description.
It is a noteworthy and well-known fact that, after witnessing the calamitous and horrific effects of the US nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, Robert Oppenheimer, considered “the father of the atomic bomb”, lived the rest of his life with deep regret for his invention and the devastation that a nuclear war could bring about, and took what action he could to oppose future developments including that of the hydrogen bomb. [5] Oppenheimer’s sentiments were also shared by Albert Einstein. Although Einstein did not himself directly contribute to the construction of the atomic bomb, his discoveries were. "Had I known that the Germans would not succeed in producing an atomic bomb," he said, "I would have never lifted a finger." [6]
Hence the perennial question: if such a weapon can never be used and is a planet destroyer, and if those scientists who were behind its original invention regretted it, why do we have it and why spend such a large budget on it?
2.2 Development of hypersonic weapons
Generally considered to be those weapons exceeding a speed of Mach 5 (approximately 3,800 miles per hour), hypersonic weapons such as ballistic missiles are nothing new.
There are many technical and engineering challenges in building and operating hypersonic weapons and those nations which have the know-how tend to be ahead of the game. However, the biggest perceived threat is the development of Manoeuvrable Re-entry Vehicles, a type of ballistic missile whose warhead is capable of autonomously tracking ground targets.
2.3 Explosives
Explosives range from massive tonne-sized devices to small home-made improvised explosive devices. They are not new and have been with us for thousands of years.
Explosives are essentially made up of various chemicals. Many of these chemicals are everyday products used in manufacturing, household cleaning etc., and are therefore readily available. When combined in a certain way, under certain conditions, they become highly dangerous. Due to the common availability of the chemicals and compounds, it is very unlikely that explosives will ever be eliminated.
The accidental explosion of 2,700 tonnes of ammonium nitrate which devastated the Lebanese capital of Beirut in August 2020 is an example of how such substances can behave in certain environments, and in this instance, the ammonium nitrate had never been intended as a weapon.
2.4 Deliberate misuse of biology
Advances in the biological sciences offer significant potential benefits in the fields of medicine but also in fields as diverse as mosquito control or replacing petroleum-based manufacturing.
But the widespread accessibility and availability of biological technologies and products has lowered the bar for the deliberate misuse of biology for nefarious purposes.
2.5 Threats to precise timing systems
Countless technological systems depend upon precise timing to deliver their required function. Timing and synchronisation is critical to such applications as communications (both open and secure), navigation, financial transactions, electrical energy distribution, railway management and signalling, radar, electronic warfare and so much more.
These applications are critical to both civilian and military infrastructure and capability and the consequences of disruption to precise timing systems can be catastrophic. Since a large number of timing systems rely on satellite communications and global navigation and positioning systems, a simple disruption to satellite time systems can have serious consequences. Space weather and space debris impact causing satellite communication disruption or damage to the satellite itself adds to the problem.
Precise timing systems are also vulnerable to cyberattacks, since such attacks can be easily targeted at the system’s ground equipment or existing satellites in space.
2.6 Cyber security, threats, attacks and deception
The term cyber, meaning “relating to or characteristic of the culture of computers, information technology, and virtual reality” entered common usage in the 80s. It is the abbreviation of cybernetics, a word popularised by American mathematician Norbert Wiener [7] in his 1948 book Cybernetics (that is the science of communications and automatic control systems in both machines and living thing) a word derived from the Greek kybernetikos “good at steering”, referring to the art of the helmsman.
The UK Government's 2016 National Cyber Security Strategy [8] lays out the definitions and approaches to tackling the many threats the UK faces in cyberspace: that interdependent network of information technology infrastructures which includes the internet, telecommunications networks, computer systems, internet-connected devices and embedded processors and controllers.
Typical and common cyber threats are cyberattacks i.e. deliberate exploitations of computer systems, digitally-dependent enterprises or networks to cause harm. One single threat on one computer system can have severe ramifications. In fact, cyberwars could completely disrupt all economy and daily lives. Critical infrastructures such as bridges, traffic, air traffic control, trains, financial transactions, damage to electrical grid, to name but a few, could bring the world to a standstill. Disruption of energy, banking and other network would bring nations to their knees.
A relatively recent example is the infamous WannaCry ransomware global cyberattack which, on 12 May 2017, brought the UK’s National Health Service to a standstill for several days affecting hospitals and doctors’ surgeries across England and Scotland. This incident resulted in the cancellation of thousands of appointments and surgical operations, together with the frantic relocation of emergency patients from stricken emergency centres. [9]
Another common and rampant cyber threat is social engineering. Social engineering in this context relates specifically to information security and differs from social engineering in the social sciences defined as the use of centralized planning in an attempt to manage social change and regulate the future development and behaviour of a society.
Here, social engineering is a form of deception which involves methods used by attackers to deceive and manipulate victims into performing an action or divulging confidential information. This could include such actions as opening a malicious webpage, or running an unwanted file attachment. Social networking sites are prime domains for social engineering.
When Sir Tim Berners-Lee released the source code for free – to make the world wide web an open and democratic platform for all – he understood how his invention could transform governments, businesses and societies for the better; advance humankind. He also envisioned that his invention could, in the wrong hands, become a destroyer of worlds. [10] A mirror reflection of Oppenheimer and his atomic bomb?
After its creation, the world wide web took on a life of its own. In essence, over the past three decades, cyberspace has morphed into some kind of Frankenstein’s monster to become the new battlefield where soldiers, weapons, and military equipment may well become defunct, only to be replaced by computer scientists, strategists, coding and programming whizzes, cyber specialists and hackers. It has already begun. A scenario somewhat reminiscent of Star Trek: A Taste of Armageddon and Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game.
In full light of what is taking place in the “cyber world”, it behoves each and every nation to take full responsibility in establishing and maintaining a peaceful and secure cyberspace for all.
Other grey areas in cyber security and surveillance programmes include products and their attendant activities which, although touted as vital for security, crime or terrorism prevention, or to offer a best consumer experience, can either significantly infringe upon civil liberties or be susceptible to various form of cyberattacks when misused or in the wrong hands. Examples of such products include closed-circuit television (CCTV), smart TV and smart phones, facial recognition technology and assistant AI technology e.g. Amazon Alexa, Google Home Hub and Apple Homepod.
In a recent Comparitech 2020 survey [11], eighteen out of the top twenty most surveilled cities in the world are in China, with London and Hyderabad being the only two cities outside China to make it in the top twenty. In fact London came third with 67.47 cameras per one thousand people. What is interesting is that a majority of the most surveilled cities are not even in the top twenty most populated cities. Tokyo, the most populated city, has 1.06 cameras per one thousand people.
As the main argument for the use of CCTV surveillance is that it “improves law enforcement and crime prevention”, the survey also compares the number of public CCTV cameras with the crime indices (as reported by Numbeo) for that area, and establishes that a higher number of cameras barely correlates with a lower crime index. (Point in case: London with 67.47 cameras per thousand has a crime index of 52.67 while Tokyo, with only 1.06 cameras per thousand has a 23.36 crime index.)
And what about smart TVs and smart phones? “Smart” equipment can be hacked and used to listen in or watch you. Therefore, it is common practice by defence organisations (government and private) to forbid the use of smart phones or smart TVs or “smart” anything in the work environment (including working from home). Certain companies impose hefty penalties such as immediate dismissal for violations of rules concerning the use of smart equipment in the workplace or when working at home, in hotels etc. The same applies for assistant AI technology: neither Alexa nor her contemporaries are permitted in the same room where an employee may be homeworking.
With regards to attendant issues and problems attached to a nation’s use of surveillance and potential subsequent descent towards the eradication of all civil liberties, no better chilling warnings exist than in George Orwell’s timeless classic 1984.
2.7 Space weather
Space weather is the collective term used to describe a series of phenomena originating from the sun. Space weather is listed as a natural hazard and described accordingly in the UK National Risk Register of Civil Emergencies. [12]
There are three main types of space weather considered in the risk register comprising 1) solar flares which reach Earth within a few hours and can cause radio blackouts; 2) solar energetic particles which travel somewhat slower and cause solar radiation storms, potentially harming astronauts if not forewarned; and 3) coronal mass ejections which take up to four days to reach Earth and cause geomagnetic storms.
Of course, the consequences can be severe potentially causing electricity blackouts (and thereby potentially causing fatalities), loss and/or disruption of global navigation satellite systems (e.g. GPS or Galileo) which could in turn affect essential services such as air travel, energy and communications and finally, increases in background radiation doses high in the atmosphere and in space. A detailed report on extreme space weather was published in 2013 by the Royal Academy of Engineering.
More extreme threats would be in the realm of asteroid strikes. Such scenarios are regularly reviewed by organisations such as the NASA Planetary Defence and the International Academy of Astronautics. It is a cinch that catastrophic events such as meteorites or solar flares should be tackled together, nations working shoulder-to-shoulder.
2.8 Conflicts in outer space
In the recent decades, the world has witnessed incredible advances and successes in space technologies especially in the commercial and private sectors, quite distinct from government-sponsored military and space operations such as by NASA, Chinese CNSA or Russian Roscosmos.
On 2 August 2020, Space X became the first private company to successfully launch and return humans to orbit when its Crew Dragon spacecraft parachuted back to Earth with NASA astronauts Douglas Hurley and Robert Behnken on board. [13]
On 18 October 2020, Space X launched 60 Starlink satellites from the Kennedy Space Centre as part of their ongoing development and creation of their Starlink network project. The purpose of the Starlink network is to provide high-speed internet access across the globe and especially in locations where access has been unreliable, expensive, or completely unavailable. [14]
A plethora of other private companies are busy researching and developing solutions for satellite configuration or launch, payload transport into space, space travel and space tourism (e.g. Skyrora, Astra, Reaction Engines, Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin, Astrium, to name but a few).
As for the planet Mars, it seems that developing the technology to invade it (or some may prefer the word “colonise”) is still very much on the agenda not only for Space X, but also for a number of groups including Russia, USA, Japan, the European Space Agency, India, China and the United Arab Emirates.
In 2014, the UAE announced that it would send a mission to Mars by the country’s 50th birthday in December 2021. On 19 July 2020, the nation’s Hope probe was successfully launched from the Tanegashima spaceport in Japan. It arrived safely in the red planet’s orbit in February 2021.
Over in the north of Scotland, a new industry is forming. In August 2020, the Highland Council North Planning Applications Committee granted its final approval for the construction of a “space hub” in the northern county of Sutherland, in the Scottish Highlands. This will be the first of its kind in the UK. [15]
As Elon Musk, founder of Space X, once said, “You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great - and that’s what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It’s about believing in the future and thinking that the future will be better than the past. And I can’t think of anything more exciting than going out there and being among the stars.” [16]
Good news abound concerning the visions and achievements of individuals and groups in the conquest of space – humanity joined together towards a common goal. So how and where does the idea of space conflicts as an extreme threat come into this?
It appears that militaries and governments are becoming worried about the proliferation of new actors with space capabilities entering the space domain. There are concerns about what it means for the “balance of power in space”, militarisation and weaponisation of space and space warfare which, it is believed, could result in all-out conflicts in outer space. Moreover, that existing or future space debris accumulating in the Earth’s orbit could damage satellites or space equipment and vehicles is a further concern.
Another significant perceived threat revolves around the vital role that satellites play in keeping the world connected and infrastructures functioning, and how satellites could become the target of adversaries.
In its April 2020 report Global Counterspace Capabilities: An Open Source Assessment, [17] the Secure World Foundation states that evidence shows significant research and development of a broad range of kinetic (i.e. destructive) and non-kinetic counterspace capabilities in multiple countries (counterspace refers to offensive and defensive operations to attain and maintain the desired control and protection in and through space). But only non-kinetic capabilities are actively being used in current military operations.
Kinetic anti-satellite weapons are those which would physically hit a satellite or other device in space, thereby either damaging it or destroying it, and creating space debris in the process. Non-kinetic anti-satellite attacks could include GPS spoofing or jamming, cyberattacks against space satellites and systems, and even laser attacks which blind signals.
The recent establishment of the first US Space Force and Space Command, and now the UK’s two-star Space Director in the Ministry of Defence as well as the French Air Force having become as of 11 September 2020 the French Air and Space Force, indicate a growing unease with regard to the expanding number of state-sponsored and commercial actors partaking in space operations and activities. These developments could be seen to represent a move towards the militarisation of space.
Considering that outer space does not belong to any one particular nation and is open to all, and that the use of space should be for the benefit of Earth and all its people, it follows that any group or nation which would seek to develop its space exploration capabilities for the benefit of humankind has the right to do so.
What is needed is common agreement and an agreed-upon code of honourable and responsible conduct by all participants. Space is simply too essential for everyone and for our survival. There is therefore no use or benefit in conflicts, except to cause misery and destruction for the world’s populations.
The more likely scenarios will be on the lines of space debris which is too difficult to monitor but could damage satellites, inoperational satellites caused by own malfunction etc. But there could also be a danger that tension on the ground due to incorrect or incomplete information lead to miscalculation - where blame is erroneously assigned to entities or groups - and which in turn could lead to conflict. This type of event is where correct, accurate, proven and validated, information - not based on gossip or supposition - is vital. (Card’s best-selling sci-fi novel Ender’s Game perfectly illustrates how an inability or refusal to communicate coupled with decisions based on wrong data can mistakenly destroy an entire species).
Sadly, history tells us that wherever humans go conflict follows with history repeating itself. Humans do not quite seem to learn from the past. And as humankind’s effort to conquer the stars progresses, there is a small minority who would once again bring their war and conflict ideologies to outer space, rather than work alongside their fellows towards a common goal.
To that end, the United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) is responsible for promoting international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space through a variety of initiatives, including maintaining the United Nations Register of Objects Launched into Outer Space.
2.9 Disruptive technologies
Disruptive technologies can be best described as an umbrella word covering a very large basket of ideas, some in their infancy, some already well developed and others yet to exist, each with potentially sweeping effects, good or bad.
The term refers to specific technologies that can fundamentally change not only established technologies but also the rules and business models of a given market, and often business and society overall. The Internet is the best known example in recent times; the personal computer and telephone in previous generations. [18]
Examples of the more predictable disruptive technologies include:
Collective intellect can be used to tackle the future and create scenarios to disrupt the fixed ideas we may have, which in turn could be used for the good of humanity, without repeating the errors of the past or bringing into being a dystopian existence so uncannily prophesised in earlier works of fiction.
3. THE ROLE OF SCIENCE FICTION IN DEFENCE AND SECURITY
In 2017, the Defence Science & Technology Laboratory (Dstl, part of the Ministry of Defence) launched the “Future Threat Understanding and Disruption Programme”. The programme “works to ensure that the UK understands the potential defence and security impact of emerging science and technology in order to reduce the chance of future 'shocks', and that the UK is prepared to respond to and counter future threats.” [19]
The programme has been engaging with a wide range of organisations and individuals including academia, learned institutions, businesses and even the ‘man in his shed’: any avenue where creative and futuristic thinking is taking place. One of its more interesting activities has been reaching out to science fiction writers and academics with a specialism in science fiction and/or creative writing. The reason for such engagement is self-evident: the military has used science fiction on and off for more than 100 years. [20]
Of course, science fiction is nothing new. Its origin can be traced back as far as circa 100 AD with a trip-to-the-moon tale by Antonius Diogenes, and in the second century AD, with Lucian of Samosata’s True History, a satire on travellers’ tales with a story about a trip to the moon. [21] Many other authors and titles ensued in the following two millennia, with a notable revival of the genre in the 17th century, continuing throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, and culminating in the 1950s, when science fiction was finally acknowledged as a legitimate literary genre, an era considered as the “golden age” of science fiction, with such greats as Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, L. Ron Hubbard, Robert A. Heinlein and Ursula K. Le Guin. (It is worth noting that Asimov, Clarke, Hubbard and Heinlein were each either scientist or engineer, and served in the military). The sci-fi literary genre has continued to thrive ever since.
3.1 The essence of science fiction
So what is science fiction and why is it so appealing as to be considered a necessary and inevitable input to defence and security strategists?
Countless studies, research papers, articles and books have been written on this subject, easily accessible to anyone with an interest. But the answer can be best summed up in the following explanation by one of the “golden age” greats, L. Ron Hubbard, during an 1983 interview for the launch of his best-selling novel Battlefield Earth:
“If you will go back through those old, gaudy pulp magazines that were being ridiculed and confiscated by irate teachers, you will find a lot of articles on space technology scattered amongst the fiction. That was because there was no other outlet for such vision. Some who wrote for the pulps were called ‘just science fiction writers’. But history has proven that they were the ones who brought about the future – not the naysayers. We knew then that Man would travel to the stars and we know it still.
“There are still those who cannot create a vision for the future and they, as before, still click their tongues to make a living and they will, again, be forgotten simply because they cannot create – they can only criticise…
“Science fiction points a direction because it does advocate a future. It is about Man and his Future. The future is the only frontier without limit and the frontier that we will all enter and cross no matter what we do.
“Science fiction is and always has been the literature about the frontier. Science fiction appeals to every age group because it is about the future and the human potential”.
Heinlein’s Starship Troopers and Card’s Ender’s Game are recommended reading on the US Marine Corps’ Commandant’s Professional Reading List [22]. So what benefits could reading science fiction bring about for the reader?
One military officer sums up why he thought reading science fiction is good for military officers [23]:
3.2 Science fiction and disruptive technologies
When attempting to understand and predict disruptive technologies, the focus is not solely on the fairly predictable and emerging technologies, but also on the more elusive black swans (an unpredictable or unforeseen event, typically one with extreme consequences) including new ways of using existing technologies which we did not think of.
A very recent example is the Autumn 2020 armed-drone war which erupted during the ongoing conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan had the upper hand through the use of weaponised drones which were able to strike soldiers, tanks, artillery and air defence systems. Drones (also called unmanned air vehicles) are relatively inexpensive equipment, and easy to manufacture and replace. Training personnel in their use is not difficult. Unlike the cost of acquiring an air fleet and training pilots, this new way of using existing drone technology demonstrated quite suddenly and unexpectedly how drones are transforming the battlefield.
Perhaps future scenarios could see drones able to precisely target military aircraft – aircraft which take many years to develop and manufacture at a very high cost. Could the humble drone affect or disrupt existing fighter programmes (e.g. Eurofighter Typhoon, F35 Lightning II) or future ones (UK Tempest, US Next Generation Air Dominance)? Could the balance of air power be affected by something so simple and comparatively inexpensive? In fact, could this scenario have already taken place?
Drones are part of a wider family of unmanned systems which include unmanned ground vehicles, unmanned or autonomous underwater vehicles, unmanned surface vehicles (on water) and unmanned vehicle for all domain. Each can be used for different purposes e.g. commercial, agriculture, military etc. They come in different sizes and configuration. They have many uses and, as has already been demonstrated, can be quite a disruptor.
Weaponised drones and unmanned systems are nothing new in science fiction; they have been around for decades. From Star Wars’ wide array of artificially intelligent probes, drones and autonomous systems (imperial probe droids, protocol droids, assassin droids, astromechs, medical droids etc.) to the Psychlos’ continued and indispensable use of weaponised and surveillance drones in Hubbard’s Battlefield Earth, to Suarez’s combat robots and drone swarms in Kill Decision, and everything else in between.
Since autonomy or autonomous technology refers to any technology or system that can function without being told what to do by a person, it follows that artificial intelligence or AI, would have to be an inherent part of such a system. Current AI and machine learning research and development focusses on the simulation of human processes by machines, such as problem solving, learning, reasoning and self-correction.
In science fiction, AI systems are often depicted in android or robot form. In Asimov’s Robot series or Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (adapted in film as Blade Runner) or Spielberg’s A.I. Artificial Intelligence (a film based on sci-fi short story Supertoys Last All Summer Long by Brian Aldiss), the AI units featured have an android form, some completely human-like.
In fact, the word robot only entered the English language in 1923 when Karel Čapek's 1921 sci-fi play R.U.R - Rossum’s Universal Robots - was translated into English from Czech and presented in London and New York. Čapek's robots are assembled out of something like flesh and blood, made according to a secret formula. Robot and robotka, the words Čapek uses in Czech for the male and female versions of these sentient biological automatons, are derived from the Czech word robota, which means "servitude, forced labor." [24]
Articles on the pros and cons of AI and machine learning abound and are readily available online and in technical journals for further research. The consensus at the moment seems to be that AI will change the world for the better (despite the negative final outcomes of such creations in a number of sci-fi stories which give food for thought).
Therefore, it is not difficult to see how AI and machine learning can be considered a very real threat across the defence and security sectors. We may not yet have crossed the threshold of AI units developing self-awareness such as the infamous HAL 9000 in Arthur C. Clarke’s 2001: A Space Odyssey and Heinlein’s militant “Mike” in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, or in android forms, but this does not preclude concurrent research and development in the field of biological and human enhancement technologies.
Biological and human enhancement technologies is another tangible and real area of disruptive technology, with cause for concern and potential threat.
Once again, the concept of human creation, of human biological or psychic enhancement, of building the “super soldier”, of mind control through brain implants, and a plethora of other enhancements or mutilations, is nothing new. It has been a part and parcel of countless science fiction stories for a very long time (and non-fiction stories such as those described in Ronson’s The Men Who Stare at Goats), with Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel Frankenstein perhaps the first of its kind.
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World human enhancements (or degradation) is undertaken right at the embryo level for population and citizen intelligence control, whereas Pierce Brown’s Red Rising sci-fi series takes Brave New World to a whole new level with the human race divided into a precise colour-coded caste system each subject to the full gamut of human enhancements or degradation.
Hubbard’s Mission Earth series, a satirical look at our current world from the point of view of an invading alien race, takes a different approach to biological and human enhancements with the use of technology and surgery merging for the purpose of degradation, for mind control (brain and optical implants) or for creating live and unwitting surveillance “hosts”. Beyond surgery and implants, we have the likes of protomolecule enhancements to create supersoldiers or hive minds in James S.A. Corey’s The Expanse series and the gland options in Iain M. Banks The Culture series to name but a few.
In our current society and era – or more precisely in this third decade of the 21st century - plastic surgery for generic body enhancements or alterations is common place, but it does not make a person superhuman. Drugs, including illicit drugs, to improve performance be it for competition or warfare have been used or trialled for decades. So much is now known about drugs and their side effects and often catastrophic consequences, that treading the drug path for biological and human enhancements can only spell trouble and failure. The fact that British armed forces take a zero-tolerance approach to substance misuse because drugs affect the fitness and reliability of service people and have a corrosive effect on operational effectiveness [25] , is a direct testament to the futility of using drugs as a genuine, useful and pro-survival human enhancement methodology.
As for implants, Elon Musk’s neuroscience start-up Neuralink aims to create a brain implant which would work as a brain-to-machine interface. It is claimed the in-brain device could not only enable humans with neurological conditions to control technology, such as phones or computers, with their thoughts (assuming that it is the brain which thinks and records mental images which may not be the case at all) but also could solve neurological disorders from memory, hearing loss and blindness to paralysis, depression and brain damage. [26]
With the psychiatric industry’s long history of physical and mental torture through the use of prefrontal lobotomies and transorbital leukotomies and, still in current practice, the use of electric convulsive therapy (ECT) and “deep brain stimulation”, coupled with a number of films and novels depicting the disturbing results and outcomes of such devices, implants and practices, it is highly probable that fiddling with the brain is not something that the average person may rush to experience, and rightly so. However, there are such technologies being currently developed, for better or for worse, and it is essential that from the point of view of predicting and understanding disruptive technologies, no stones should be left unturned in their examination.
In the final analysis, all the above may become defunct in the face of the mighty quantum computing revolution. A recent Harvard Business Review article Are You Ready for the Quantum Computing Revolution? [27], asserts that the quantum race is already underway, that governments and private investors all around the world are pouring billions of dollars into quantum research and development, and that IBM, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and other companies are investing heavily in developing large-scale quantum computing hardware and software which could revolutionise the world as we know it.
In the UK, the National Quantum Computing Centre has been established and the National Quantum Technologies Programme is well underway.
Whatever happens, quantum computing is a “hot” disruptive technology, and is definitely on the radar of global defence and security actors.
3.3 Science fiction and the Defence Lines of Development (DLODs)
Within the Ministry of Defence, the Defence Lines of Development, or DLODs, provide a mechanism for co-ordinating the parallel development of different aspects of capability that need to be brought together to create a real military capability: training, equipment, personnel, information, doctrine [and concepts], organisation, infrastructure and logistics, usually abbreviated to TEPIDOIL. [28]
The ability to think across these lines of development and determine how it all fits in, in the context of the real world, is an incredibly challenging task which requires the creative minds of many.
Science fiction works cover far more than just creative machinery or equipment (being only one aspect of the DLODs), and include very relevant human elements such as training, personnel, information, organisation, communication, ethics, emotions etc. They also imagine a wide array of apocalyptic scenarios and outcomes resulting from creativity bent on destruction or as a consequence of unethical human decision-making. Moreover, “dysfunctional utopias” which are in fact slavery and mind control mechanisms are the subject of many a sci-fi story, giving a stark warning and food for thought to those individuals, groups or governments seeking the realisation of such vision under the guise of “defence and security”.
This aspect of science fiction creativity does make significant contributions to defence and security strategists not only in setting up a wide range of potential scenarios but also in describing and predicting their likely outcomes, good or bad.
Keeping in mind that defence activities should revolve around the protection of those one is meant to defend, serious questions should be asked where an individual, group, nation or state begins activities on a line of development predicted to cause human chaos, destruction, degradation or annihilation. It is highly improbable that such activities could be ethically classified as “defensive” or for the sake of “security”.
The United Kingdom is certainly not the only nation seeking to predict future states of defence, security, and warfare through the creative minds of science fiction writers.
Across the English Channel, the French Defence Innovation Agency (Agence de l’innovation de defense) announced in its 2019 [29] review report the creation of a “Red team” comprised of just four or five sci-fi writers which will be expected to think more creatively than more traditional elements of the army. The visionaries will "propose scenarios of disruption" that military strategists may not think of. Through role play and other techniques, the team attempts to imagine how terrorist organisations or foreign states could use advanced technology. [30]
There is no doubt that similar approaches are being followed by a number of other nations. It would be illogical not to do so.
Any project or programme aimed at predicting and foreseeing future states in defence, space and security should insist on a holistic but critical approach which would seek to better understand not only the relationship and interaction between existing and emerging technologies, black swans and DLODs but also their outcomes and/or effects upon our planet and humankind. Those lines of development which would wipe out or destroy the best part of whole populations, or make our planet inhabitable, cannot possibly be considered sane or civilised.
4. CONCLUSION
It is no wonder that defence and security strategists continue to turn to science fiction and, such as in the case of Dstl, reach out and engage with academia and individuals specialising in creative writing in the realm of science fiction. Even the words “science” and “engineering” by their very own etymology signal a requirement for knowledge and creativity, with the word “engineering” deriving from Latin ingenium, meaning “genius, invention” and the word “science” deriving from Latin scientia, from scio, meaning “to know”.
Unfortunately, the existing creative and productive relationships between the military and science fiction writers and academics may be facing an insidious threat, actively weaving its tendrils in and out of their endeavours, far more dangerous and damaging than the extreme threats at the top of all military agendas.
In the 1950s, during the “golden age” of science fiction, psychology began an attack on the genre dismissing it with such claims that science fiction evades real life. More recently, sci-fi has once again been the target of psychologists with the newly propounded theory of the “great fantasy migration hypothesis” which supposes that the real world of unemployment and debt is too disappointing for a generation of entitled narcissists. They consequently migrate to a land of make-believe where they can live out their grandiose fantasies, dressing up as Princess Leia or Darth Vader to make them happy and keep them out of trouble. [31]
This theory was academically published in 2015 in the paper A Psychological Exploration of Engagement in Geek Culture [32] and proceeds to define a “geek” as “an enthusiast who develops expertise on a topic through exceptional determination and devotion. The word “geek” is used to describe not only enthusiasts in science, technology, and engineering but also especially devoted fans of media (i.e., “fandom geeks”).” Examples given in the paper include Dungeons and Dragons, Star Trek, Iron Man, Thor, World of Warcraft, Comicon and DragonCon to name a few.
The paper goes on to state that “These studies present evidence that individuals may engage in geek culture in order to maintain narcissistic self-views (the great fantasy migration hypothesis), to fulfil belongingness needs (the belongingness hypothesis), and to satisfy needs for creative expression (the need for engagement hypothesis). Geek engagement is found to be associated with elevated grandiose narcissism”.
In essence, according to psychology’s latest trends, anyone in the military or civilian domains who enjoys science fiction and fantasy (in book or other format), dressing up in heroes, writing sci-fi or fantasy stories, and even being a science or engineer enthusiast - in fact anyone who enjoys a wealth and richness of creativity - can now be classified as not only being narcissistic but also as having some mental derangement. This is evidently another attempt by psychology to destroy that creativity in mankind without which the great leaps and bounds into space exploration and technological innovation would have never taken place. Humanity would still be living in pre-historic times if not already wiped out.
Had the countless theories produced by psychology and its practitioners born out to be valid and practical, then war, famine and poverty would be non-existent, prisons would be unnecessary since there would be little or no criminal behaviour by citizens, and the education system would fail no-one. Humanity would really be conquering outer space. We can thus conclude, looking at the current state of the world, that the numerous psychological theories bandied about in the last one hundred and fifty years have produced little more than further human degradation.
We can therefore safely assume that it must be quite safe to push forward with science fiction and continue to benefit from the great minds of engineers, scientists and artists alike without the need to disparage such minds. Those who cannot create, indeed can only criticise.
Human creativity and imagination knows no bounds and is limitless, whereas science and engineering are limited because of the “rules” of physics and the material universe.
Through the arts, we can demonstrate ideas that do not follow the rules of physics as we know them at the moment, such as intergalactic space travel, transporters or certain military sci-fi scenarios. We can imagine them, write about them, create art about them, and through the scientific, technological, engineering and mathematics professions, by making new scientific discoveries or finding new ways of applying existing scientific knowledge, we may yet make them a reality.
But in a time of high-speed technological development, where the focus is becoming more and more on the machine, and less and less on the human being, science fiction encourages a diverse and eclectic look into potential futures. It not only offers a wide alternative vista and panoramic view of life on Earth and beyond as it could become through poor, short-sighted civilian and military decision-making, excessive focus on mechanistic considerations to the detriment of the humanities and outright ignorance of the human potential, but it also highlights alternative highways and byways which, if taken, could bring about a positive and much improved future state of existence for each and every citizen of Earth.
5. LIST OF REFERENCED NON-FICTION AND FICTION BOOKS
Copies of the books referenced in this paper can be obtained from good libraries, all good bookstores and online.
Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine by N. Wiener
Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card
1984 by George Orwell
Lucian’s True History by Lucian of Samosata
Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard
Mission Earth series by L. Ron Hubbard
Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein
Kill Decision by Daniel Suarez
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Philip K. Dick
Supertoys Last All Summer Long by Brian Aldiss
R.U.R (Rossum’s Universal Robots) by Karel Čapek
2001: A Space Odyssey by Arthur C. Clarke
The Men who Stare at Goats by Jon Ronson
Frankenstein by Marry Shelley
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Red Rising series by Pierce Brown
The Expanse series by James S.A. Corey
The Culture by Iain M. Banks
The works of renowned American scientist, Carl Sagan, on the catastrophic consequences of nuclear war on humans and the planet brought home the fact that nuclear weapons cannot possibly be a solution for a civilisation which seeks to flourish and prosper, as it could never do so under the perpetual shadow of this annihilating technology.
In fact, a most apt analogy would be that of the Death Star in the Star Wars universe. The Death Star is constructed as the ultimate weapon and cannot be fought against despite readily available advanced technologies by those who would oppose it. It instils a permanent veil of fear across the various worlds and is used as the ultimate planet destroyer. The atomic, and the more powerful hydrogen bomb, also fit this description.
It is a noteworthy and well-known fact that, after witnessing the calamitous and horrific effects of the US nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, Robert Oppenheimer, considered “the father of the atomic bomb”, lived the rest of his life with deep regret for his invention and the devastation that a nuclear war could bring about, and took what action he could to oppose future developments including that of the hydrogen bomb. [5] Oppenheimer’s sentiments were also shared by Albert Einstein. Although Einstein did not himself directly contribute to the construction of the atomic bomb, his discoveries were. "Had I known that the Germans would not succeed in producing an atomic bomb," he said, "I would have never lifted a finger." [6]
Hence the perennial question: if such a weapon can never be used and is a planet destroyer, and if those scientists who were behind its original invention regretted it, why do we have it and why spend such a large budget on it?
2.2 Development of hypersonic weapons
Generally considered to be those weapons exceeding a speed of Mach 5 (approximately 3,800 miles per hour), hypersonic weapons such as ballistic missiles are nothing new.
There are many technical and engineering challenges in building and operating hypersonic weapons and those nations which have the know-how tend to be ahead of the game. However, the biggest perceived threat is the development of Manoeuvrable Re-entry Vehicles, a type of ballistic missile whose warhead is capable of autonomously tracking ground targets.
2.3 Explosives
Explosives range from massive tonne-sized devices to small home-made improvised explosive devices. They are not new and have been with us for thousands of years.
Explosives are essentially made up of various chemicals. Many of these chemicals are everyday products used in manufacturing, household cleaning etc., and are therefore readily available. When combined in a certain way, under certain conditions, they become highly dangerous. Due to the common availability of the chemicals and compounds, it is very unlikely that explosives will ever be eliminated.
The accidental explosion of 2,700 tonnes of ammonium nitrate which devastated the Lebanese capital of Beirut in August 2020 is an example of how such substances can behave in certain environments, and in this instance, the ammonium nitrate had never been intended as a weapon.
2.4 Deliberate misuse of biology
Advances in the biological sciences offer significant potential benefits in the fields of medicine but also in fields as diverse as mosquito control or replacing petroleum-based manufacturing.
But the widespread accessibility and availability of biological technologies and products has lowered the bar for the deliberate misuse of biology for nefarious purposes.
2.5 Threats to precise timing systems
Countless technological systems depend upon precise timing to deliver their required function. Timing and synchronisation is critical to such applications as communications (both open and secure), navigation, financial transactions, electrical energy distribution, railway management and signalling, radar, electronic warfare and so much more.
These applications are critical to both civilian and military infrastructure and capability and the consequences of disruption to precise timing systems can be catastrophic. Since a large number of timing systems rely on satellite communications and global navigation and positioning systems, a simple disruption to satellite time systems can have serious consequences. Space weather and space debris impact causing satellite communication disruption or damage to the satellite itself adds to the problem.
Precise timing systems are also vulnerable to cyberattacks, since such attacks can be easily targeted at the system’s ground equipment or existing satellites in space.
2.6 Cyber security, threats, attacks and deception
The term cyber, meaning “relating to or characteristic of the culture of computers, information technology, and virtual reality” entered common usage in the 80s. It is the abbreviation of cybernetics, a word popularised by American mathematician Norbert Wiener [7] in his 1948 book Cybernetics (that is the science of communications and automatic control systems in both machines and living thing) a word derived from the Greek kybernetikos “good at steering”, referring to the art of the helmsman.
The UK Government's 2016 National Cyber Security Strategy [8] lays out the definitions and approaches to tackling the many threats the UK faces in cyberspace: that interdependent network of information technology infrastructures which includes the internet, telecommunications networks, computer systems, internet-connected devices and embedded processors and controllers.
Typical and common cyber threats are cyberattacks i.e. deliberate exploitations of computer systems, digitally-dependent enterprises or networks to cause harm. One single threat on one computer system can have severe ramifications. In fact, cyberwars could completely disrupt all economy and daily lives. Critical infrastructures such as bridges, traffic, air traffic control, trains, financial transactions, damage to electrical grid, to name but a few, could bring the world to a standstill. Disruption of energy, banking and other network would bring nations to their knees.
A relatively recent example is the infamous WannaCry ransomware global cyberattack which, on 12 May 2017, brought the UK’s National Health Service to a standstill for several days affecting hospitals and doctors’ surgeries across England and Scotland. This incident resulted in the cancellation of thousands of appointments and surgical operations, together with the frantic relocation of emergency patients from stricken emergency centres. [9]
Another common and rampant cyber threat is social engineering. Social engineering in this context relates specifically to information security and differs from social engineering in the social sciences defined as the use of centralized planning in an attempt to manage social change and regulate the future development and behaviour of a society.
Here, social engineering is a form of deception which involves methods used by attackers to deceive and manipulate victims into performing an action or divulging confidential information. This could include such actions as opening a malicious webpage, or running an unwanted file attachment. Social networking sites are prime domains for social engineering.
When Sir Tim Berners-Lee released the source code for free – to make the world wide web an open and democratic platform for all – he understood how his invention could transform governments, businesses and societies for the better; advance humankind. He also envisioned that his invention could, in the wrong hands, become a destroyer of worlds. [10] A mirror reflection of Oppenheimer and his atomic bomb?
After its creation, the world wide web took on a life of its own. In essence, over the past three decades, cyberspace has morphed into some kind of Frankenstein’s monster to become the new battlefield where soldiers, weapons, and military equipment may well become defunct, only to be replaced by computer scientists, strategists, coding and programming whizzes, cyber specialists and hackers. It has already begun. A scenario somewhat reminiscent of Star Trek: A Taste of Armageddon and Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game.
In full light of what is taking place in the “cyber world”, it behoves each and every nation to take full responsibility in establishing and maintaining a peaceful and secure cyberspace for all.
Other grey areas in cyber security and surveillance programmes include products and their attendant activities which, although touted as vital for security, crime or terrorism prevention, or to offer a best consumer experience, can either significantly infringe upon civil liberties or be susceptible to various form of cyberattacks when misused or in the wrong hands. Examples of such products include closed-circuit television (CCTV), smart TV and smart phones, facial recognition technology and assistant AI technology e.g. Amazon Alexa, Google Home Hub and Apple Homepod.
In a recent Comparitech 2020 survey [11], eighteen out of the top twenty most surveilled cities in the world are in China, with London and Hyderabad being the only two cities outside China to make it in the top twenty. In fact London came third with 67.47 cameras per one thousand people. What is interesting is that a majority of the most surveilled cities are not even in the top twenty most populated cities. Tokyo, the most populated city, has 1.06 cameras per one thousand people.
As the main argument for the use of CCTV surveillance is that it “improves law enforcement and crime prevention”, the survey also compares the number of public CCTV cameras with the crime indices (as reported by Numbeo) for that area, and establishes that a higher number of cameras barely correlates with a lower crime index. (Point in case: London with 67.47 cameras per thousand has a crime index of 52.67 while Tokyo, with only 1.06 cameras per thousand has a 23.36 crime index.)
And what about smart TVs and smart phones? “Smart” equipment can be hacked and used to listen in or watch you. Therefore, it is common practice by defence organisations (government and private) to forbid the use of smart phones or smart TVs or “smart” anything in the work environment (including working from home). Certain companies impose hefty penalties such as immediate dismissal for violations of rules concerning the use of smart equipment in the workplace or when working at home, in hotels etc. The same applies for assistant AI technology: neither Alexa nor her contemporaries are permitted in the same room where an employee may be homeworking.
With regards to attendant issues and problems attached to a nation’s use of surveillance and potential subsequent descent towards the eradication of all civil liberties, no better chilling warnings exist than in George Orwell’s timeless classic 1984.
2.7 Space weather
Space weather is the collective term used to describe a series of phenomena originating from the sun. Space weather is listed as a natural hazard and described accordingly in the UK National Risk Register of Civil Emergencies. [12]
There are three main types of space weather considered in the risk register comprising 1) solar flares which reach Earth within a few hours and can cause radio blackouts; 2) solar energetic particles which travel somewhat slower and cause solar radiation storms, potentially harming astronauts if not forewarned; and 3) coronal mass ejections which take up to four days to reach Earth and cause geomagnetic storms.
Of course, the consequences can be severe potentially causing electricity blackouts (and thereby potentially causing fatalities), loss and/or disruption of global navigation satellite systems (e.g. GPS or Galileo) which could in turn affect essential services such as air travel, energy and communications and finally, increases in background radiation doses high in the atmosphere and in space. A detailed report on extreme space weather was published in 2013 by the Royal Academy of Engineering.
More extreme threats would be in the realm of asteroid strikes. Such scenarios are regularly reviewed by organisations such as the NASA Planetary Defence and the International Academy of Astronautics. It is a cinch that catastrophic events such as meteorites or solar flares should be tackled together, nations working shoulder-to-shoulder.
2.8 Conflicts in outer space
In the recent decades, the world has witnessed incredible advances and successes in space technologies especially in the commercial and private sectors, quite distinct from government-sponsored military and space operations such as by NASA, Chinese CNSA or Russian Roscosmos.
On 2 August 2020, Space X became the first private company to successfully launch and return humans to orbit when its Crew Dragon spacecraft parachuted back to Earth with NASA astronauts Douglas Hurley and Robert Behnken on board. [13]
On 18 October 2020, Space X launched 60 Starlink satellites from the Kennedy Space Centre as part of their ongoing development and creation of their Starlink network project. The purpose of the Starlink network is to provide high-speed internet access across the globe and especially in locations where access has been unreliable, expensive, or completely unavailable. [14]
A plethora of other private companies are busy researching and developing solutions for satellite configuration or launch, payload transport into space, space travel and space tourism (e.g. Skyrora, Astra, Reaction Engines, Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin, Astrium, to name but a few).
As for the planet Mars, it seems that developing the technology to invade it (or some may prefer the word “colonise”) is still very much on the agenda not only for Space X, but also for a number of groups including Russia, USA, Japan, the European Space Agency, India, China and the United Arab Emirates.
In 2014, the UAE announced that it would send a mission to Mars by the country’s 50th birthday in December 2021. On 19 July 2020, the nation’s Hope probe was successfully launched from the Tanegashima spaceport in Japan. It arrived safely in the red planet’s orbit in February 2021.
Over in the north of Scotland, a new industry is forming. In August 2020, the Highland Council North Planning Applications Committee granted its final approval for the construction of a “space hub” in the northern county of Sutherland, in the Scottish Highlands. This will be the first of its kind in the UK. [15]
As Elon Musk, founder of Space X, once said, “You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great - and that’s what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It’s about believing in the future and thinking that the future will be better than the past. And I can’t think of anything more exciting than going out there and being among the stars.” [16]
Good news abound concerning the visions and achievements of individuals and groups in the conquest of space – humanity joined together towards a common goal. So how and where does the idea of space conflicts as an extreme threat come into this?
It appears that militaries and governments are becoming worried about the proliferation of new actors with space capabilities entering the space domain. There are concerns about what it means for the “balance of power in space”, militarisation and weaponisation of space and space warfare which, it is believed, could result in all-out conflicts in outer space. Moreover, that existing or future space debris accumulating in the Earth’s orbit could damage satellites or space equipment and vehicles is a further concern.
Another significant perceived threat revolves around the vital role that satellites play in keeping the world connected and infrastructures functioning, and how satellites could become the target of adversaries.
In its April 2020 report Global Counterspace Capabilities: An Open Source Assessment, [17] the Secure World Foundation states that evidence shows significant research and development of a broad range of kinetic (i.e. destructive) and non-kinetic counterspace capabilities in multiple countries (counterspace refers to offensive and defensive operations to attain and maintain the desired control and protection in and through space). But only non-kinetic capabilities are actively being used in current military operations.
Kinetic anti-satellite weapons are those which would physically hit a satellite or other device in space, thereby either damaging it or destroying it, and creating space debris in the process. Non-kinetic anti-satellite attacks could include GPS spoofing or jamming, cyberattacks against space satellites and systems, and even laser attacks which blind signals.
The recent establishment of the first US Space Force and Space Command, and now the UK’s two-star Space Director in the Ministry of Defence as well as the French Air Force having become as of 11 September 2020 the French Air and Space Force, indicate a growing unease with regard to the expanding number of state-sponsored and commercial actors partaking in space operations and activities. These developments could be seen to represent a move towards the militarisation of space.
Considering that outer space does not belong to any one particular nation and is open to all, and that the use of space should be for the benefit of Earth and all its people, it follows that any group or nation which would seek to develop its space exploration capabilities for the benefit of humankind has the right to do so.
What is needed is common agreement and an agreed-upon code of honourable and responsible conduct by all participants. Space is simply too essential for everyone and for our survival. There is therefore no use or benefit in conflicts, except to cause misery and destruction for the world’s populations.
The more likely scenarios will be on the lines of space debris which is too difficult to monitor but could damage satellites, inoperational satellites caused by own malfunction etc. But there could also be a danger that tension on the ground due to incorrect or incomplete information lead to miscalculation - where blame is erroneously assigned to entities or groups - and which in turn could lead to conflict. This type of event is where correct, accurate, proven and validated, information - not based on gossip or supposition - is vital. (Card’s best-selling sci-fi novel Ender’s Game perfectly illustrates how an inability or refusal to communicate coupled with decisions based on wrong data can mistakenly destroy an entire species).
Sadly, history tells us that wherever humans go conflict follows with history repeating itself. Humans do not quite seem to learn from the past. And as humankind’s effort to conquer the stars progresses, there is a small minority who would once again bring their war and conflict ideologies to outer space, rather than work alongside their fellows towards a common goal.
To that end, the United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) is responsible for promoting international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space through a variety of initiatives, including maintaining the United Nations Register of Objects Launched into Outer Space.
2.9 Disruptive technologies
Disruptive technologies can be best described as an umbrella word covering a very large basket of ideas, some in their infancy, some already well developed and others yet to exist, each with potentially sweeping effects, good or bad.
The term refers to specific technologies that can fundamentally change not only established technologies but also the rules and business models of a given market, and often business and society overall. The Internet is the best known example in recent times; the personal computer and telephone in previous generations. [18]
Examples of the more predictable disruptive technologies include:
- Big data and advanced analytics
- Artificial intelligence (AI)
- Autonomy
- Space and aeronautical technologies (including drones)
- Quantum computing and technologies
- Biological and human enhancement technologies
- Hydrogen technology
- Novel materials and manufacturing
- ….. and those which are not so predictable….
Collective intellect can be used to tackle the future and create scenarios to disrupt the fixed ideas we may have, which in turn could be used for the good of humanity, without repeating the errors of the past or bringing into being a dystopian existence so uncannily prophesised in earlier works of fiction.
3. THE ROLE OF SCIENCE FICTION IN DEFENCE AND SECURITY
In 2017, the Defence Science & Technology Laboratory (Dstl, part of the Ministry of Defence) launched the “Future Threat Understanding and Disruption Programme”. The programme “works to ensure that the UK understands the potential defence and security impact of emerging science and technology in order to reduce the chance of future 'shocks', and that the UK is prepared to respond to and counter future threats.” [19]
The programme has been engaging with a wide range of organisations and individuals including academia, learned institutions, businesses and even the ‘man in his shed’: any avenue where creative and futuristic thinking is taking place. One of its more interesting activities has been reaching out to science fiction writers and academics with a specialism in science fiction and/or creative writing. The reason for such engagement is self-evident: the military has used science fiction on and off for more than 100 years. [20]
Of course, science fiction is nothing new. Its origin can be traced back as far as circa 100 AD with a trip-to-the-moon tale by Antonius Diogenes, and in the second century AD, with Lucian of Samosata’s True History, a satire on travellers’ tales with a story about a trip to the moon. [21] Many other authors and titles ensued in the following two millennia, with a notable revival of the genre in the 17th century, continuing throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, and culminating in the 1950s, when science fiction was finally acknowledged as a legitimate literary genre, an era considered as the “golden age” of science fiction, with such greats as Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, L. Ron Hubbard, Robert A. Heinlein and Ursula K. Le Guin. (It is worth noting that Asimov, Clarke, Hubbard and Heinlein were each either scientist or engineer, and served in the military). The sci-fi literary genre has continued to thrive ever since.
3.1 The essence of science fiction
So what is science fiction and why is it so appealing as to be considered a necessary and inevitable input to defence and security strategists?
Countless studies, research papers, articles and books have been written on this subject, easily accessible to anyone with an interest. But the answer can be best summed up in the following explanation by one of the “golden age” greats, L. Ron Hubbard, during an 1983 interview for the launch of his best-selling novel Battlefield Earth:
“If you will go back through those old, gaudy pulp magazines that were being ridiculed and confiscated by irate teachers, you will find a lot of articles on space technology scattered amongst the fiction. That was because there was no other outlet for such vision. Some who wrote for the pulps were called ‘just science fiction writers’. But history has proven that they were the ones who brought about the future – not the naysayers. We knew then that Man would travel to the stars and we know it still.
“There are still those who cannot create a vision for the future and they, as before, still click their tongues to make a living and they will, again, be forgotten simply because they cannot create – they can only criticise…
“Science fiction points a direction because it does advocate a future. It is about Man and his Future. The future is the only frontier without limit and the frontier that we will all enter and cross no matter what we do.
“Science fiction is and always has been the literature about the frontier. Science fiction appeals to every age group because it is about the future and the human potential”.
Heinlein’s Starship Troopers and Card’s Ender’s Game are recommended reading on the US Marine Corps’ Commandant’s Professional Reading List [22]. So what benefits could reading science fiction bring about for the reader?
One military officer sums up why he thought reading science fiction is good for military officers [23]:
- It elevates us above the tactical. ...
- It shifts our paradigm to different subjects. ...
- It nurtures hope. ...
- And it informs us about bad potential futures. ...
- It nurtures innovative thought. ...
- It encourages diversity in intellectual development. ...
- It reminds us of the enduring nature of our profession. …
3.2 Science fiction and disruptive technologies
When attempting to understand and predict disruptive technologies, the focus is not solely on the fairly predictable and emerging technologies, but also on the more elusive black swans (an unpredictable or unforeseen event, typically one with extreme consequences) including new ways of using existing technologies which we did not think of.
A very recent example is the Autumn 2020 armed-drone war which erupted during the ongoing conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan had the upper hand through the use of weaponised drones which were able to strike soldiers, tanks, artillery and air defence systems. Drones (also called unmanned air vehicles) are relatively inexpensive equipment, and easy to manufacture and replace. Training personnel in their use is not difficult. Unlike the cost of acquiring an air fleet and training pilots, this new way of using existing drone technology demonstrated quite suddenly and unexpectedly how drones are transforming the battlefield.
Perhaps future scenarios could see drones able to precisely target military aircraft – aircraft which take many years to develop and manufacture at a very high cost. Could the humble drone affect or disrupt existing fighter programmes (e.g. Eurofighter Typhoon, F35 Lightning II) or future ones (UK Tempest, US Next Generation Air Dominance)? Could the balance of air power be affected by something so simple and comparatively inexpensive? In fact, could this scenario have already taken place?
Drones are part of a wider family of unmanned systems which include unmanned ground vehicles, unmanned or autonomous underwater vehicles, unmanned surface vehicles (on water) and unmanned vehicle for all domain. Each can be used for different purposes e.g. commercial, agriculture, military etc. They come in different sizes and configuration. They have many uses and, as has already been demonstrated, can be quite a disruptor.
Weaponised drones and unmanned systems are nothing new in science fiction; they have been around for decades. From Star Wars’ wide array of artificially intelligent probes, drones and autonomous systems (imperial probe droids, protocol droids, assassin droids, astromechs, medical droids etc.) to the Psychlos’ continued and indispensable use of weaponised and surveillance drones in Hubbard’s Battlefield Earth, to Suarez’s combat robots and drone swarms in Kill Decision, and everything else in between.
Since autonomy or autonomous technology refers to any technology or system that can function without being told what to do by a person, it follows that artificial intelligence or AI, would have to be an inherent part of such a system. Current AI and machine learning research and development focusses on the simulation of human processes by machines, such as problem solving, learning, reasoning and self-correction.
In science fiction, AI systems are often depicted in android or robot form. In Asimov’s Robot series or Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (adapted in film as Blade Runner) or Spielberg’s A.I. Artificial Intelligence (a film based on sci-fi short story Supertoys Last All Summer Long by Brian Aldiss), the AI units featured have an android form, some completely human-like.
In fact, the word robot only entered the English language in 1923 when Karel Čapek's 1921 sci-fi play R.U.R - Rossum’s Universal Robots - was translated into English from Czech and presented in London and New York. Čapek's robots are assembled out of something like flesh and blood, made according to a secret formula. Robot and robotka, the words Čapek uses in Czech for the male and female versions of these sentient biological automatons, are derived from the Czech word robota, which means "servitude, forced labor." [24]
Articles on the pros and cons of AI and machine learning abound and are readily available online and in technical journals for further research. The consensus at the moment seems to be that AI will change the world for the better (despite the negative final outcomes of such creations in a number of sci-fi stories which give food for thought).
Therefore, it is not difficult to see how AI and machine learning can be considered a very real threat across the defence and security sectors. We may not yet have crossed the threshold of AI units developing self-awareness such as the infamous HAL 9000 in Arthur C. Clarke’s 2001: A Space Odyssey and Heinlein’s militant “Mike” in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, or in android forms, but this does not preclude concurrent research and development in the field of biological and human enhancement technologies.
Biological and human enhancement technologies is another tangible and real area of disruptive technology, with cause for concern and potential threat.
Once again, the concept of human creation, of human biological or psychic enhancement, of building the “super soldier”, of mind control through brain implants, and a plethora of other enhancements or mutilations, is nothing new. It has been a part and parcel of countless science fiction stories for a very long time (and non-fiction stories such as those described in Ronson’s The Men Who Stare at Goats), with Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel Frankenstein perhaps the first of its kind.
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World human enhancements (or degradation) is undertaken right at the embryo level for population and citizen intelligence control, whereas Pierce Brown’s Red Rising sci-fi series takes Brave New World to a whole new level with the human race divided into a precise colour-coded caste system each subject to the full gamut of human enhancements or degradation.
Hubbard’s Mission Earth series, a satirical look at our current world from the point of view of an invading alien race, takes a different approach to biological and human enhancements with the use of technology and surgery merging for the purpose of degradation, for mind control (brain and optical implants) or for creating live and unwitting surveillance “hosts”. Beyond surgery and implants, we have the likes of protomolecule enhancements to create supersoldiers or hive minds in James S.A. Corey’s The Expanse series and the gland options in Iain M. Banks The Culture series to name but a few.
In our current society and era – or more precisely in this third decade of the 21st century - plastic surgery for generic body enhancements or alterations is common place, but it does not make a person superhuman. Drugs, including illicit drugs, to improve performance be it for competition or warfare have been used or trialled for decades. So much is now known about drugs and their side effects and often catastrophic consequences, that treading the drug path for biological and human enhancements can only spell trouble and failure. The fact that British armed forces take a zero-tolerance approach to substance misuse because drugs affect the fitness and reliability of service people and have a corrosive effect on operational effectiveness [25] , is a direct testament to the futility of using drugs as a genuine, useful and pro-survival human enhancement methodology.
As for implants, Elon Musk’s neuroscience start-up Neuralink aims to create a brain implant which would work as a brain-to-machine interface. It is claimed the in-brain device could not only enable humans with neurological conditions to control technology, such as phones or computers, with their thoughts (assuming that it is the brain which thinks and records mental images which may not be the case at all) but also could solve neurological disorders from memory, hearing loss and blindness to paralysis, depression and brain damage. [26]
With the psychiatric industry’s long history of physical and mental torture through the use of prefrontal lobotomies and transorbital leukotomies and, still in current practice, the use of electric convulsive therapy (ECT) and “deep brain stimulation”, coupled with a number of films and novels depicting the disturbing results and outcomes of such devices, implants and practices, it is highly probable that fiddling with the brain is not something that the average person may rush to experience, and rightly so. However, there are such technologies being currently developed, for better or for worse, and it is essential that from the point of view of predicting and understanding disruptive technologies, no stones should be left unturned in their examination.
In the final analysis, all the above may become defunct in the face of the mighty quantum computing revolution. A recent Harvard Business Review article Are You Ready for the Quantum Computing Revolution? [27], asserts that the quantum race is already underway, that governments and private investors all around the world are pouring billions of dollars into quantum research and development, and that IBM, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and other companies are investing heavily in developing large-scale quantum computing hardware and software which could revolutionise the world as we know it.
In the UK, the National Quantum Computing Centre has been established and the National Quantum Technologies Programme is well underway.
Whatever happens, quantum computing is a “hot” disruptive technology, and is definitely on the radar of global defence and security actors.
3.3 Science fiction and the Defence Lines of Development (DLODs)
Within the Ministry of Defence, the Defence Lines of Development, or DLODs, provide a mechanism for co-ordinating the parallel development of different aspects of capability that need to be brought together to create a real military capability: training, equipment, personnel, information, doctrine [and concepts], organisation, infrastructure and logistics, usually abbreviated to TEPIDOIL. [28]
The ability to think across these lines of development and determine how it all fits in, in the context of the real world, is an incredibly challenging task which requires the creative minds of many.
Science fiction works cover far more than just creative machinery or equipment (being only one aspect of the DLODs), and include very relevant human elements such as training, personnel, information, organisation, communication, ethics, emotions etc. They also imagine a wide array of apocalyptic scenarios and outcomes resulting from creativity bent on destruction or as a consequence of unethical human decision-making. Moreover, “dysfunctional utopias” which are in fact slavery and mind control mechanisms are the subject of many a sci-fi story, giving a stark warning and food for thought to those individuals, groups or governments seeking the realisation of such vision under the guise of “defence and security”.
This aspect of science fiction creativity does make significant contributions to defence and security strategists not only in setting up a wide range of potential scenarios but also in describing and predicting their likely outcomes, good or bad.
Keeping in mind that defence activities should revolve around the protection of those one is meant to defend, serious questions should be asked where an individual, group, nation or state begins activities on a line of development predicted to cause human chaos, destruction, degradation or annihilation. It is highly improbable that such activities could be ethically classified as “defensive” or for the sake of “security”.
The United Kingdom is certainly not the only nation seeking to predict future states of defence, security, and warfare through the creative minds of science fiction writers.
Across the English Channel, the French Defence Innovation Agency (Agence de l’innovation de defense) announced in its 2019 [29] review report the creation of a “Red team” comprised of just four or five sci-fi writers which will be expected to think more creatively than more traditional elements of the army. The visionaries will "propose scenarios of disruption" that military strategists may not think of. Through role play and other techniques, the team attempts to imagine how terrorist organisations or foreign states could use advanced technology. [30]
There is no doubt that similar approaches are being followed by a number of other nations. It would be illogical not to do so.
Any project or programme aimed at predicting and foreseeing future states in defence, space and security should insist on a holistic but critical approach which would seek to better understand not only the relationship and interaction between existing and emerging technologies, black swans and DLODs but also their outcomes and/or effects upon our planet and humankind. Those lines of development which would wipe out or destroy the best part of whole populations, or make our planet inhabitable, cannot possibly be considered sane or civilised.
4. CONCLUSION
It is no wonder that defence and security strategists continue to turn to science fiction and, such as in the case of Dstl, reach out and engage with academia and individuals specialising in creative writing in the realm of science fiction. Even the words “science” and “engineering” by their very own etymology signal a requirement for knowledge and creativity, with the word “engineering” deriving from Latin ingenium, meaning “genius, invention” and the word “science” deriving from Latin scientia, from scio, meaning “to know”.
Unfortunately, the existing creative and productive relationships between the military and science fiction writers and academics may be facing an insidious threat, actively weaving its tendrils in and out of their endeavours, far more dangerous and damaging than the extreme threats at the top of all military agendas.
In the 1950s, during the “golden age” of science fiction, psychology began an attack on the genre dismissing it with such claims that science fiction evades real life. More recently, sci-fi has once again been the target of psychologists with the newly propounded theory of the “great fantasy migration hypothesis” which supposes that the real world of unemployment and debt is too disappointing for a generation of entitled narcissists. They consequently migrate to a land of make-believe where they can live out their grandiose fantasies, dressing up as Princess Leia or Darth Vader to make them happy and keep them out of trouble. [31]
This theory was academically published in 2015 in the paper A Psychological Exploration of Engagement in Geek Culture [32] and proceeds to define a “geek” as “an enthusiast who develops expertise on a topic through exceptional determination and devotion. The word “geek” is used to describe not only enthusiasts in science, technology, and engineering but also especially devoted fans of media (i.e., “fandom geeks”).” Examples given in the paper include Dungeons and Dragons, Star Trek, Iron Man, Thor, World of Warcraft, Comicon and DragonCon to name a few.
The paper goes on to state that “These studies present evidence that individuals may engage in geek culture in order to maintain narcissistic self-views (the great fantasy migration hypothesis), to fulfil belongingness needs (the belongingness hypothesis), and to satisfy needs for creative expression (the need for engagement hypothesis). Geek engagement is found to be associated with elevated grandiose narcissism”.
In essence, according to psychology’s latest trends, anyone in the military or civilian domains who enjoys science fiction and fantasy (in book or other format), dressing up in heroes, writing sci-fi or fantasy stories, and even being a science or engineer enthusiast - in fact anyone who enjoys a wealth and richness of creativity - can now be classified as not only being narcissistic but also as having some mental derangement. This is evidently another attempt by psychology to destroy that creativity in mankind without which the great leaps and bounds into space exploration and technological innovation would have never taken place. Humanity would still be living in pre-historic times if not already wiped out.
Had the countless theories produced by psychology and its practitioners born out to be valid and practical, then war, famine and poverty would be non-existent, prisons would be unnecessary since there would be little or no criminal behaviour by citizens, and the education system would fail no-one. Humanity would really be conquering outer space. We can thus conclude, looking at the current state of the world, that the numerous psychological theories bandied about in the last one hundred and fifty years have produced little more than further human degradation.
We can therefore safely assume that it must be quite safe to push forward with science fiction and continue to benefit from the great minds of engineers, scientists and artists alike without the need to disparage such minds. Those who cannot create, indeed can only criticise.
Human creativity and imagination knows no bounds and is limitless, whereas science and engineering are limited because of the “rules” of physics and the material universe.
Through the arts, we can demonstrate ideas that do not follow the rules of physics as we know them at the moment, such as intergalactic space travel, transporters or certain military sci-fi scenarios. We can imagine them, write about them, create art about them, and through the scientific, technological, engineering and mathematics professions, by making new scientific discoveries or finding new ways of applying existing scientific knowledge, we may yet make them a reality.
But in a time of high-speed technological development, where the focus is becoming more and more on the machine, and less and less on the human being, science fiction encourages a diverse and eclectic look into potential futures. It not only offers a wide alternative vista and panoramic view of life on Earth and beyond as it could become through poor, short-sighted civilian and military decision-making, excessive focus on mechanistic considerations to the detriment of the humanities and outright ignorance of the human potential, but it also highlights alternative highways and byways which, if taken, could bring about a positive and much improved future state of existence for each and every citizen of Earth.
5. LIST OF REFERENCED NON-FICTION AND FICTION BOOKS
Copies of the books referenced in this paper can be obtained from good libraries, all good bookstores and online.
Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine by N. Wiener
Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card
1984 by George Orwell
Lucian’s True History by Lucian of Samosata
Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard
Mission Earth series by L. Ron Hubbard
Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein
Kill Decision by Daniel Suarez
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Philip K. Dick
Supertoys Last All Summer Long by Brian Aldiss
R.U.R (Rossum’s Universal Robots) by Karel Čapek
2001: A Space Odyssey by Arthur C. Clarke
The Men who Stare at Goats by Jon Ronson
Frankenstein by Marry Shelley
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Red Rising series by Pierce Brown
The Expanse series by James S.A. Corey
The Culture by Iain M. Banks
6. REFERENCE LIST
[1] Ministry of Defence. Introducing the Integrated Operating Concept [online]. Bristol: Defence Intellectual Property Rights, 2020, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-integrated-operating-concept-2025
[2] American Heritage Dictionary, online [accessed October 2020]
[3] Oxford English Dictionary, online [accessed October 2020]
[4] Policy paper: The UK’s nuclear deterrent: what you need to know. Updated 19 February 2018, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-nuclear-deterrence-factsheet/uk-nuclear-deterrence-what-you-need-to-know [accessed 19/10/2020]
[5] https://www.history.com/news/father-of-the-atomic-bomb-was-blacklisted-for-opposing-h-bomb [accessed 12/12/2020]
[6] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/11/ive-created-a-monster-on-the-regrets-of-inventors/249044/ [accessed 10/12/2020]
[7] https://www.britannica.com/science/cybernetics [accessed 24/10/2020]
[8] HM Government ‘National Cyber Security Strategy 2016-2021’, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/567242/national_cyber_security_strategy_2016.pdf
[9] https://www.acronis.com/en-gb/articles/nhs-cyber-attack/ Online [accessed 09/02/2021]
[10] Brooker, K., “I was devastated”: Tim Berners-Lee, the Man who created the World Wide Web, has some regrets, Vanity Fair, August 2018, https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/07/the-man-who-created-the-world-wide-web-has-some-regrets [accessed 12/12/2020]
[11] Bischoff, P. Surveillance camera statistics: which cities have the most CCTV cameras?, 22 July 2020, https://www.comparitech.com/vpn-privacy/the-worlds-most-surveilled-cities/ [accessed 12/12/2020]
[12] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-risk-register-of-civil-emergencies-2017-edition [accessed 21/10/2020]
[13] Radome, Aerospace, Royal Aeronautical Society, 2020, Vol. 47 No. 9, p.7
[14] https://www.starlink.com/ [accessed 21/10/2020]
[15] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/08/scotland-approves-highlands-spaceport/ [accessed 24/10/2020]
[16] https://www.spacex.com/mission/ [accessed 21/10/2020]
[17] https://swfound.org/media/206957/swf_global_counterspace_april2020_es.pdf [accessed 24/10/2020]
[18] Oxford Reference https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110810104753313 [accessed 25/10/2020]
[19] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/future-threat-understanding-and-disruption-programme [accessed 25/10/2020]
[20] https://onezero.medium.com/the-u-s-military-is-turning-to-science-fiction-to-shape-the-future-of-war-1b40d11eb6b4 [accessed 25/10/2020]
[21] Hubbard, L.R. “Mission Earth: The Invaders Plan” Vol.1, p.1-4, Galaxy Press : Los Angeles
[22] USMC Commandant’s Professional Reading List, online https://mca-marines.org/blog/resource/commandants-professional-reading-list/ [accessed 12/12/2020]
[23] Brigadier Ryan, M, Why reading science fiction is good for military officers, 23 March 2016 https://groundedcuriosity.com/why-reading-science-fiction-is-good-for-military-officers/#.X5XyKlDgqUk [accessed 25/10/20]
[24] The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language online, https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=robot [accessed 18/12/2020]
[25] https://www.army.mod.uk/people/join-well/drugs-and-supplements/
[26] Hitti, N., Elon Musk unveils updated Neuralink brain implant design and surgical robot, Dezeen, 2 September 2020 online https://www.dezeen.com/2020/09/02/neuralink-elon-musk-brain-implant-technology/ [accessed 12/12/2020]
[27] Ghose, S., Are you ready for the quantum computing revolution, Harvard Business Review, 17 September 2020, online https://hbr.org/2020/09/are-you-ready-for-the-quantum-computing-revolution [accessed 10/12/2020]
[28] Defence Lines of Development analysis with MODAF https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/36720/20090210_MODAFDLODAnalysis_V1_0_U.pdf [accessed 1 December 2020]
[29] Ministere des armees, Innovation De Défense bilan D’activités 2019 , https://www.defense.gouv.fr/aid/l-agence/documentation/documentation [accessed 25/10/2020]
[30] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49044892 [accessed 25/10/2020]
[31] Miller, G. Fan of sci-fi? Psychologists have you in their sights, 18 Feb 2020, https://theconversation.com/fan-of-sci-fi-psychologists-have-you-in-their-sights-131342 [accessed 25/10/2020]
[32] McCain et al. A Psychological Exploration of Engagement in Geek Culture, PLoS One. 2015; 10(11): e0142200.
[2] American Heritage Dictionary, online [accessed October 2020]
[3] Oxford English Dictionary, online [accessed October 2020]
[4] Policy paper: The UK’s nuclear deterrent: what you need to know. Updated 19 February 2018, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-nuclear-deterrence-factsheet/uk-nuclear-deterrence-what-you-need-to-know [accessed 19/10/2020]
[5] https://www.history.com/news/father-of-the-atomic-bomb-was-blacklisted-for-opposing-h-bomb [accessed 12/12/2020]
[6] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/11/ive-created-a-monster-on-the-regrets-of-inventors/249044/ [accessed 10/12/2020]
[7] https://www.britannica.com/science/cybernetics [accessed 24/10/2020]
[8] HM Government ‘National Cyber Security Strategy 2016-2021’, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/567242/national_cyber_security_strategy_2016.pdf
[9] https://www.acronis.com/en-gb/articles/nhs-cyber-attack/ Online [accessed 09/02/2021]
[10] Brooker, K., “I was devastated”: Tim Berners-Lee, the Man who created the World Wide Web, has some regrets, Vanity Fair, August 2018, https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/07/the-man-who-created-the-world-wide-web-has-some-regrets [accessed 12/12/2020]
[11] Bischoff, P. Surveillance camera statistics: which cities have the most CCTV cameras?, 22 July 2020, https://www.comparitech.com/vpn-privacy/the-worlds-most-surveilled-cities/ [accessed 12/12/2020]
[12] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-risk-register-of-civil-emergencies-2017-edition [accessed 21/10/2020]
[13] Radome, Aerospace, Royal Aeronautical Society, 2020, Vol. 47 No. 9, p.7
[14] https://www.starlink.com/ [accessed 21/10/2020]
[15] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/08/scotland-approves-highlands-spaceport/ [accessed 24/10/2020]
[16] https://www.spacex.com/mission/ [accessed 21/10/2020]
[17] https://swfound.org/media/206957/swf_global_counterspace_april2020_es.pdf [accessed 24/10/2020]
[18] Oxford Reference https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110810104753313 [accessed 25/10/2020]
[19] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/future-threat-understanding-and-disruption-programme [accessed 25/10/2020]
[20] https://onezero.medium.com/the-u-s-military-is-turning-to-science-fiction-to-shape-the-future-of-war-1b40d11eb6b4 [accessed 25/10/2020]
[21] Hubbard, L.R. “Mission Earth: The Invaders Plan” Vol.1, p.1-4, Galaxy Press : Los Angeles
[22] USMC Commandant’s Professional Reading List, online https://mca-marines.org/blog/resource/commandants-professional-reading-list/ [accessed 12/12/2020]
[23] Brigadier Ryan, M, Why reading science fiction is good for military officers, 23 March 2016 https://groundedcuriosity.com/why-reading-science-fiction-is-good-for-military-officers/#.X5XyKlDgqUk [accessed 25/10/20]
[24] The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language online, https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=robot [accessed 18/12/2020]
[25] https://www.army.mod.uk/people/join-well/drugs-and-supplements/
[26] Hitti, N., Elon Musk unveils updated Neuralink brain implant design and surgical robot, Dezeen, 2 September 2020 online https://www.dezeen.com/2020/09/02/neuralink-elon-musk-brain-implant-technology/ [accessed 12/12/2020]
[27] Ghose, S., Are you ready for the quantum computing revolution, Harvard Business Review, 17 September 2020, online https://hbr.org/2020/09/are-you-ready-for-the-quantum-computing-revolution [accessed 10/12/2020]
[28] Defence Lines of Development analysis with MODAF https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/36720/20090210_MODAFDLODAnalysis_V1_0_U.pdf [accessed 1 December 2020]
[29] Ministere des armees, Innovation De Défense bilan D’activités 2019 , https://www.defense.gouv.fr/aid/l-agence/documentation/documentation [accessed 25/10/2020]
[30] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49044892 [accessed 25/10/2020]
[31] Miller, G. Fan of sci-fi? Psychologists have you in their sights, 18 Feb 2020, https://theconversation.com/fan-of-sci-fi-psychologists-have-you-in-their-sights-131342 [accessed 25/10/2020]
[32] McCain et al. A Psychological Exploration of Engagement in Geek Culture, PLoS One. 2015; 10(11): e0142200.