Composed of 86 billion neurons, the human brain is nothing short of an absolute marvel. This composite cobweb is slowly but surely becoming a technological hotspot, with massive funds poured to detect and record its activity and synergise it with smart devices, a phenomenon called Brain-Chip Interface (BCI). A notable initiative that captured headlines in this regard was a brain chip implant, a sophisticated version of BCI, by Elon Musk’s Neuralink in January 2024, followed by his recent intent towards a second human implant, which is believed to repair spinal cord injuries, treat schizophrenia, and overhaul human cognition skills.
The United States (US) has already allocated USD 402 million for its Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) initiative. The project chiefly aims to treat neurological and communication disorders, visual and mental health, and alcoholism. Similarly, China is also hedging its bets on brain research by funnelling massive funds of USD 746 million for its brain project to compete with its American counterparts. These efforts, to unlock the brain’s potential, coupled with the fear of falling behind in this novel technological field, compel both heavyweight contenders to keep pace with a controversial yet rapidly evolving area.
With initial focus on medical applications, the interest in brain chips has quickly caught the attention of military and strategic planners. This is evident in the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM)’s Cyborg Soldier Study 2050, which visualises future ‘super soldiers’ having neural enhancement chips alongside other technologies that will enable them to operate under extreme conditions by boosting their mental resilience. China, under its national strategy of civil-military fusion, is focused on ‘brain-machine integration, enabled by cloud infrastructure’ to enhance its soldiers’ cognitive warfare capabilities. This effective human-machine teaming could enable the combatants to seamlessly control their actions and effectively operate in austere conditions.
Considering its healthcare applications, militaries worldwide are also considering these miniature powerhouses to treat numerous clinical disorders. The U.S. Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), with a hefty funding of USD 78 million under ‘Project ElectRX’ is planning neural implants in soldiers’ brain to cure mental health and depression in post-war scenarios. By using deep brain stimulations, the technology is expected to treat Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in veterans returning from war zones.
While future super soldiers, with optimised capabilities marching on the battlefield, is no longer a thing for sci-fic movies, brain chips come with a minefield of challenges. Due to possible compatibility issues with Apple IOs and Google Android, brain chips are vulnerable to hacking and privacy risks. And as one analyst noted, this modernisation could leave the human brain at the mercy of tech giants, enabling them to manipulate brain functions. Relatedly, the potential utilisation of such disruptive technology in the hands of non-state actors, who might use these minuscule agents to achieve their nefarious designs cannot be ruled out.
Beyond the immediate security risks, these coin-sized devices present significant legal challenges, particularly in relation to the laws of armed conflict. The deployment and design of such technologies are likely to provoke complex legal questions surrounding accountability and attribution, especially concerning their role in large-scale atrocities such as mass killings and genocide during conflict or crisis situations. Serious concerns also arise regarding the detachment of neural enhancement devices from soldiers’ brains once they transition back to civilian life. Removal of BCIs can lead to multitude medical complications, including potential neurological and psychological damage. Hence, brain chips are likely to become a focal point for ethical and moral debates in the future.
In this regard, Ingmar Persson and Julian SavulescuIt (from ‘Unfit for the Future’ fame), have argued for investment in moral decision-making enhancement processes to strengthen, e.g., a soldier’s moral motivations and avoid unwanted outcomes in the battlefield. Similarly, there is a need for robust legal frameworks that can address the unique challenges posed by such potential advanced technological and psychological warfare. Comprehensive strategies should also be in place to answer the medical and ethical implications associated with the ‘disengagement’ of such technologies; and adequate cyber security measures that make brain chips hacking proof – all of which are challenging tasks.
While the integration of brain chips in human brains offers significant potential, it is crucial to recognise that these devices are not without risks. The dual-use nature of this technology, coupled with serious cybersecurity, privacy, and ethical concerns, poses grim threats to employing forces and adversaries alike. As such, it is essential to carefully consider the multifaceted implications of their deployment, particularly the potential for ‘cognitive sabotage.’
Shaheer Ahmad is Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace and Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad. He can be reached at cass.thinkers@casstt.com.
