“The history of command can thus be understood in terms of a race between the demand for information and the ability
of command systems to meet it.”

— Martin van Creveld
Command in War (1985)

Lethality has long served as a core organizing principle in military thought, doctrine, and capability development. Traditionally understood as the capacity to inflict physical destruction on an adversary, lethality has been measured in range, payload, accuracy, survivability, and firepower. Its logic has been platform-centered and materially grounded: the destructive effect resides in weapons, while human actors determine when and how that effect is applied.

The diffusion of artificial intelligence across military systems complicates this settled understanding. Policymakers and strategists increasingly invoke “AI lethality,” yet the term is often left undefined, sometimes implying greater destructive yield, other times suggesting something more structural. This ambiguity risks obscuring a deeper transformation already underway.

AI lethality does not simply amplify firepower. It reorganizes the informational and temporal conditions under which force becomes possible, timely, and decisive. Whereas conventional lethality resides in platforms and munitions, AI lethality resides in data architectures, decision systems, and networked integration that shape how, when, and whether force is employed at all. The locus of advantage shifts from explosive output to decision tempo.

In an era of competitive multipolarity—especially in the Indo-Pacific—this shift carries profound implications for deterrence credibility, crisis stability, and force design. This chapter argues that AI lethality represents a structural shift from weapon-centered destruction to system-level decision advantage, redefining how military power is generated, governed, and contested.

https://doi.org/10.71236/npfss9qe