美国空军协会（AFA）：建立联盟并与中国竞争：无人机出口改革的必要性2022（英文）-28页_2mb

MITCHELL INSTITUTE Policy Paper Summary

Core Content

The MITCHELL INSTITUTE policy paper emphasizes the need for the United States to reform its RPA (Remotely Piloted Aircraft) export policies to better align with current global realities and U.S. national security interests. The paper argues that overly restrictive policies have allowed China, Russia, and other competitors to fill the export gap, undermining U.S. influence and strategic advantages.

Main Points

• Global RPA Proliferation: Over 95 countries operate RPA, and more than 30 militaries use armed variants. RPA technologies are no longer at risk of uncontrolled proliferation as they have already spread widely.

• U.S. Export Restrictions: Current U.S. export policies for RPA are overly restrictive and based on misconceptions. They are often classified under the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), despite RPA not being missiles or nuclear warheads.

• Strategic Implications: These policies weaken U.S. alliances, reduce interoperability among coalitions, and allow competitors like China to gain influence and market share. China has become the largest exporter of armed RPA, with Russia also actively involved.

• Human Control in RPA Operations: RPA are not "killer bots" but require extensive human involvement, including pilots, sensor operators, intelligence analysts, and commanders. They are controlled in real-time with strict oversight to ensure proportionality and minimize collateral damage.

• Operational Advantages: RPA provide persistent, real-time ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance) and precision strike capabilities that are often more effective than manned aircraft in certain scenarios. They offer better target identification, reduced human error, and improved situational awareness.

• Policy Recommendations:

  • Define armed RPA as military aircraft, not cruise missiles, for export policy purposes.
  • Engage with MTCR signatories to remove RPA from the MTCR while maintaining nonproliferation commitments.
  • Encourage non-signatory states to adopt the 2016 "Joint Declaration for the Export and Subsequent Use of Armed or Strike-Enabled Unmanned Aerial Vehicles."
  • Establish a working group to improve monitoring and end-use agreements for RPA exports.
  • Re-engage allies and partners who have purchased Chinese RPA and promote U.S. alternatives.

Key Information

• RPA as Military Aircraft: RPA require significant human involvement and are not fully autonomous. They are treated like manned aircraft in terms of control and oversight.

• Impact of Restrictive Policies: These policies reduce U.S. influence and diplomatic leverage, and allow adversaries to gain access to RPA without the same end-use restrictions.

• Real-World Examples:

  • Example 1: RPA provide more precise and deliberate close air support compared to manned fighters due to their slower speed and ability to loiter over targets.
  • Example 2: In a real mission, a manned fighter lost target custody due to terrain and speed, resulting in unintended casualties. RPA, with their smaller turn radius and ability to loiter, could have avoided this.

• Strategic Competition: The U.S. is losing ground in the global RPA market to China and Russia. Exporting RPA to allies and partners is a strategic imperative to maintain U.S. influence and build integrated deterrence.

Conclusion

The paper concludes that U.S. RPA export policies are outdated and misaligned with the current operational and strategic landscape. Reforming these policies to reflect the reality of RPA operations and their value in building alliances and promoting stability is essential for U.S. national security and global leadership.