2. AI in Roads - Shaza Arif - Article thematic Image - OCT copy

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is integrating into our lives at an expedited pace. Every day, autonomy is being explored further to ornate existing and new technologies to reap maximum benefits. From computer screens to highways, self-driving or autonomous vehicles have emerged as an interesting application of AI. The idea of self-driving cars has been in the offing for a long time, but the pursuit of autonomous vehicles in the AI age has created excitement amongst the public and pushed for greater effort to translate this idea into reality.

American and Chinese companies are extensively exploring autonomous driving. Tech Conglomerates such as Tesla, Waymo, Xiaomi, and Baidu are racing to develop, refine and excel in this technology. Last week, Baidu announced that it had gained approval to operate fully autonomous robotaxis in Chongqing and Wuhan (in the less populated zones). Tesla has claimed that it foresees itself as a USD 500 billion company via advancements in autonomous driving. Likewise, Waymo announced an investment of USD 2.5 billion toward autonomous driving in 2021. Xiaomi also plans to spend around USD 8 billion on Research and Development projects related to self-driving vehicles.

Although this technology is still in nascent stages and will take time to reach its full potential, it is certain that it is here to stay and will be explored rigorously, particularly by the US and China. While it remains to be seen who leads this race, the more critical aspect in this regard is how it will affect peoples’ daily lives.

Commuting via autonomous cars appears very tempting as it has potential benefits. They seem to minimise human-related errors on the road, offer a comfortable ride without the driving hassle, and can be shared by multiple users. Conversely, it also comes with potential risks that require due attention. Apart from the high cost of autonomous systems and the infringement of privacy issues, they are a potential security risk. In 2021, two people in an autonomous Tesla died after the car crashed into a tree. Since 2016, nearly 30 crashes of self-driving Tesla vehicles have been reported, out of which 19 were fatal. In April this year, a self-driving truck of TuSimple slammed into a concrete barricade during its test drive. Similarly, it was reported last month that autonomous Apple vehicles crashed into the bay area of the company’s headquarters and had trouble navigating the streets. It is likely that with time, these cars might become safer with more advanced and intelligent technology. Still, these events clearly manifest the safety risks they might pose and are a reminder of threats that may emerge in diverse forms.

What makes the security angle even more problematic is that despite the unprecedented efficiency of AI, it remains vulnerable to attacks. The fact remains that AI is the amalgamation of engineering techniques that lacks rationale thinking which humans can do. Hence, it can be manipulated and deceived. Adversarial attacks on ML pose a significant threat to autonomous vehicles on the road. Even slight modifications  to road signs can lead to wrong interpretations by detection systems of the car, which can cause considerable devastation. The threat of hacking these systems can also lead to fatal circumstances.

Autonomous vehicles might appear appealing during the trial phase, but smooth transition between hybrid mode, i.e., combination of autonomous and human-driven cars, remains a highly challenging task as well. Traffic management in the age of autonomous driving may be less complicated in technologically advanced countries such as the US, China, and European states. However, it is nearly impossible to envision on the roads of developing countries where there are diverse kinds of vehicles as well as different traffic patterns (or even none), on which the vehicles may not have been trained. Hence, the concept of one-size-fits-all cannot be applied to autonomous vehicles.

Autonomous driving would require extensive regulations and highly robust cyber security networks to operate smoothly. Perhaps this increasing complexity is one of the reasons that autonomous cars have still not been able to meet the approximate deadlines proposed by experts. In 2015, Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Google’s co-founder Sergey Brin predicted that autonomous cars would be around by 2017. Later, Musk promised a fleet of 1 million driverless taxis by 2020 – still remains pending. Billions of dollars have been invested in this technology but apparently, it still has a long way to go.

Autonomous driving is the manifestation of steering AI into our lives. This technology has the potential to reshape traffic, road safety and even urbanisation patterns in the longer run. Nevertheless, one thing is certain, the race towards acing this technology could prove dangerous as bringing AI on the road is going to have notable consequences in the future.

Shaza Arif is a Researcher at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. She can be reached at [email protected]


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 »