EURODRONES Inc. A report by Ben Hayes, Chris Jones & Eric Töpfer PUBLICATION INFO Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to the input of Mathias Monroy, Stefanie Sifft, Mathias Vermeulen and Wim Zwijnenburg for their suggestions regarding aspects of the report. Copyright and publication details This report is published by the Transnational Institute and Statewatch under ISSN 1756-851X. Personal usage as pri- vate individuals/”fair dealing” is allowed. Usage by those working for organisations is allowed provided the organi- sation holds an appropriate licence from the relevant repro- graphic rights organisation (eg. Copyright Licensing Agen- cy in the UK), with such usage being subject to the terms and conditions of that licence and to local copyright law. Authors Ben Hayes, Chris Jones & Eric Toepfer Design Hans Roor at Jubels, Amsterdam Contact Transnational Institute (TNI) PO Box 14656, 1001 LD, Amsterdam The Netherlands Tel: +31-20-6626608 Email: [email protected] www.tni.org Statewatch PO Box 1516, London, N16 0EW England Tel: +44-207 697 4202 Email: [email protected] www.statewatch.org Amsterdam, February 2014 EURODRONES Inc. A report by Ben Hayes, Chris Jones & Eric Töpfer EURODRONES Inc. Contents 1. Introduction 7 2. Drones and the European Union: a lobbyist’s paradise 10 2.1. Summary 10 2.2. Reaching for the stars 11 2.3. The road to drone-ware 12 2.4. Establishing a favourable regulatory environment 14 2.5. Towards an EU drone policy 18 2.6. Going global: EU + USA = ICAO drone standards? 21 2.7. “Drone-washing”: the battle for hearts and minds 23 3. EU-funded drone research 26 3.1. Summary 26 3.2. Research for a secure Europe? 27 3.3. Drones and the EU security research agenda 27 3.4. Drones and the EU Joint Research Centre 29 3.5. Drones for EU border control 30 3.6. Police and security drones 32 3.7. Every other kind of drone 34 3.8. Droning on: towards Horizon 2020 34 3.9. Summary of major UAV-related projects funded under the FP7 programme 38 4. The EU and military drones 39 4.1. Summary 39 4.2. National competition or European integration? 40 4.3. Cooperation through desperation 42 4.4. Militarising Europe 43 4.5. The European Defence Agency and drones 44 4.6. Transparency and accountability 46 4.7. EDA research projects 47 4.8. In the sea and on the ground 49 4.9. More to come 50 4.10. Export controls 50 4.11. EDA expenditure on unmanned and autonomous research and development 52 5. Above and beyond: the European Space Agency and drones 54 5.1. Summary 54 5.2. Space for peace? 55 5.3. The European Space Policy: satellites for security 56 5.4. Beyond the line of sight: deepening cooperation with the European Defence Agency 58 5.5. ESA drone programmes 61 5.6. Making space for drones 64 6. Patrolling the borders: Frontex and drones 65 6.1. Summary 65 6.2. The EU border police agency 66 6.3. Friends in high places 67 6.4. Structured dialogue with the drone industry 69 6.5. Critical perspectives 71 6.6. Transparency and accountability 72 6.7. The shape of wings to come 73 7. Conclusions and recommendations 76 7.1. A policy designed by the drone industry, for the drone industry 76 7.2. Increase accountability, transparency and democratic control of EU drone policy 77 7.3. Devise an R&D policy that fosters innovation rather than militarisation 78 7.4. Set out a meaningful agenda for the protection of peoples’ rights 78 7.5. Prevent drone wars, proliferation and the degradation of international law 79 7.6. Prohibit the development of fully autonomous drones 81 List of acronyms 83 Despite the often benign intent behind 1. Introduction collaborative European ‘research’ into integrated land, air, maritime, space and This report examines the considerable economic and poli- tical support given to the drone industry by the European cyber-surveillance systems, the EU’s secu- Union. This support has now reached a level at which we can speak of an emerging EU drone policy based on two in- rity and R&D policy is coalescing around terlinked principles. First, there is an urgent need to deve- lop and use drones in Europe for a wide and as yet unlimi- a high-tech blueprint for a new kind of ted range of purposes. Second, the various barriers – chiefly regulatory and technical – to the introduction and routine security. It envisages a future world of red use of drones in EU airspace must be overcome. This report explains the thinking and actions behind these principles. zones and green zones; external borders It documents EU expenditure of some 500 million euros to develop and promote drones since they first appeared on controlled by military force and internally the EU radar in the late 1990s, supplementing the substan- tial investment in drones by many member states. Yet, save by a sprawling network of physical and for a few guarded European Commission communiques, virtual security checkpoints; public spaces, very little information has been made available to the pu- blic about the scope and breadth of the EU’s drone activities micro-states and ‘mega events’ policed by and ambitions. This report has been produced to inform the peoples of Europe and to encourage activism and de- high-tech surveillance systems and rapid bate around what is happening. reaction forces; ‘peacekeeping’ and ‘crisis For those unfamiliar with the technology, ‘drones’ are typi- cally aircraft – although land and sea-based vehicles are in management’ missions that make no ope- development – without a human pilot on board. They are also known as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), remotely pilo- rational distinction between the suburbs of ted vehicles (RPVs), or, in conjunction with their ground- based control stations, unmanned aerial systems (UAS) or Basra or the Banlieue; and the increasing remotely piloted aerial systems (RPAS). Flight may be con- trolled by a person stationed elsewhere or by an on-board integration of defence and national secu- computer, which is driving the development of increasingly- autonomous drones. As this report will show, drones come in rity functions at home and abroad. all shapes and sizes, some little different to remote-controlled It is not just a case of “sleepwalking into” toy planes, others as futuristic as the spaceships imagined in years gone by. At least 16 of the 27 EU member states already or “waking up to” a “surveillance society”, own drones for military (combat and reconnaissance) or non-military (surveillance and detection) purposes.2 The de- as the UK’s Information Commissioner sign, development and production of more than 400 different unmanned aerial vehicle systems is now reportedly spread famously warned, it feels more like turning across at least 21 EU countries.3 a blind eye to the start of a new kind of Representatives of the industry tend not to like the term ‘drones’ as their products have become synonymous with arms race, one in which all the weapons ‘drone strikes’ and extrajudicial killings under the CIA and US military programmes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen are pointing inwards. and Somalia accelerated by President Obama. They don’t much like the term “unmanned” aerial vehicle either, be- cause it implies that there is no pilot at all, which is why the term “remotely piloted” is back in vogue, though as autono- ‘Neoconopticon: the EU Security Industrial Complex’, mous drones develop there may be no actual pilot to speak Statewatch/TNI, 20091 of ultimately. 1 http://www.statewatch.org/analyses/neoconopticon-report.pdf or http://www.tni.org/report/neoconopticon 2 ‘List of unmanned aerial vehicles’, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unmanned_aerial_vehicles 3 Peter van Blyenburgh, “UAS Industry & Market Issues”, presentation to European Commission UAS Panel, 1st Workshop, Brussels 12 July 2011, http://ec.europa.eu/enter- prise/docs/uas/00_UVS_International.pdf 7 EURODRONES Inc. Few new technologies have captured the media’s attention ted driving processes and ‘smart mobility’ in our cars?6 Of like drones. It’s easy to see why. On the one hand, they are course we should protect worthwhile innovation, but we among the most visible elements of a revolution in robo- should not blindly support innovation that brings threats tics and artificial intelligence that promises to transform to our rights and liberties. The time to have a proper,public not just our airspace but all of the vehicles and appliances discussion about appropriate EU policies including checks- we use today. On the other, they epitomise peoples’ fears and-balances on the development, manufacture, sale and about a world in which we are not just served but policed introduction of drones in both military and non-military by robots; robots which can kill. Of course, there are many contexts is before rather than after we start to see them in situations in which drones may indisputably serve the pu- widespread use. blic interest – search-and-rescue, environmental monito- ring, dealing with hazardous materials etc. – but there are The European Commission has long subsidised research, widespread concerns about both military and non-military development and international cooperation among drone uses, particularly surveillance. manufacturers. The European Defence Agency is spon- soring pan-European research and development for both In the past few years we have witnessed research into and military and civilian drones. The European Space Agency the development of drones capable not just of killing people is funding and undertaking research into the satellites and at distance, but what are effectively flying CCTV cameras, communications infrastructure used to fly drones. Frontex, micro-drones equipped with microphones, drones with the EU’s border agency, is keen to deploy surveillance dro- equipment capable of intercepting mobile phone data, dro- nes along and beyond the EU’s borders to hunt for migrants nes with autonomous targeting and tracking capabilities, and refugees.