Shah Muhammad-AVATAR-MDS

Artificial Intelligence (AI) seems to be on the cusp of automating border security protocols and customs operations. The National Centre for Border Security and Immigration at the University of Arizona has developed an AI prototype called the ‘Automated Virtual Agent for Truth Assessments in Real Time’ (AVATAR). Funded by the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), it has been designed on the principles of Machine Learning (ML), computer vision, and Natural Language Processing (NLP). Its essential purpose is to enhance border security and expedite the operational efficiency of Customs Authorities in order to counter security threats arising out of immigration, crime, and terrorism. The existing border security regime in the US is helmed by the US Customs and Border Protection Agency, with law enforcement officials monitoring and screening entrants at over 300 land, air and sea ports.

Employing AI and sensor technologies, AVATAR is able to detect, identify, and screen individuals travelling across the border. It examines speech, posture, tone and facial expressions while asking questions via an interactive AI agent. The anomaly detection is coded as green (low risk), yellow (medium risk), orange (medium-high risk), and red (high risk). Anomalous or suspicious behaviour is subsequently flagged, leading to further follow-up investigation by customs officials. Although the project is still undergoing design and development improvements, the DHS is hopeful that it has the potential to enhance the operational efficiency of Customs Authorities who usually endure long queues and backlog at the border.

AVATAR was successfully tested in a real-world setting at the US-Mexico border in 2012. It then caught the attention of Frontex, a European Union (EU) border control agency. It underwent field trials at Bucharest Airport in Romania where it was used to interview travellers in their native language and analysed their posture, tone, and facial gestures. According to Aaron Elkins, one of the developers of the system, AVATAR has an average deception detection rate of 60 to 75%, whereas that of humans as judges is 54 to 60% at best.

The indigenous development of similar AI system may be of significance in other countries as well. For instance, Pakistan has been reeling from terrorism which was responsible for 65% fatalities in 2023, with a total of 586 terror attacks recorded in the same year.  Pakistan attributes many of these attacks to cross-border terrorism along its Western border. Apart from the routine checks by customs authorities, Pakistan has fenced the Pak-Afghan border which has reached 98% completion. In this regard, an ML-based detection system could serve as a counter-terrorism AI tool for the country. It could be deployed at domestic customs checkpoints for the purpose of screening miscreants who cross the border in the guise of civilians.

However, AI systems are susceptible to recurrent cyber-attacks and data breaches. Similarly, in the absence of robust cyber security defences, AVATAR or any similar AI detection system might fall prey to an adversarial attack or cyberterrorism that could manipulate its algorithm and ML processes. Consequently, it might misidentify and misjudge individuals during the screening process, entailing far-reaching implications for border security and data privacy. It remains to be seen if these issues could pose a threat to such AI systems once they are fully deployed in the future. If such an eventuality does transpire, the algorithm might get manipulated as a result, allowing terrorists to travel across a border without getting flagged by the system. In the case of Pakistan, this might ensue exacerbation in cross-border terrorism. Any potential effort in the future towards automation of border security may first require a push towards cordiality and mutual trust in Pak-Afghan relations. Installation of an AI system for border security at the Pak-Afghan border would also need to account for the sociopolitical and security context of Pak-Afghan relations. Locals may need more exposure and understanding to get used to such technology. Pakistan’s economic woes are further hurdles in terms of funding such a project. Thus, the government would need to wait for the right time to initiate such a project once it acquires adequate technological grounding, economic stability and normalisation of Pak-Afghan relations. Albeit, developing an indigenous AI detection system for national security is possible in the future as the government has already announced adoption of AI in the development sector.

AVATAR has not been fully deployed in the US yet as it is undergoing Research and Development. However, field tests of this system exhibit an idea of the future of border security which will most likely be characterised by intelligent systems and ML interfaces. Pakistan is marred by multifaceted challenges which might hamper efforts towards automating border security. However, the country may be in a position to indigenously develop such systems once it acquires the requisite a strong technological and economic base.

Shah Muhammad is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. He can be reached at: [email protected].

Design Credit:  Mysha Dua Salman


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »