State dossier
China
CHN · CHINA · on the world map
What does it want?
Position: unclear or shifting (AMBIG). Has said things that point in more than one direction.
Unclear or shifting (AMBIG), since 2018-04-13, stated directly (EXPLICIT)
Has said things that point in more than one direction.
At the Geneva talks in April 2018, China said it supported negotiating a ban on the use of fully autonomous lethal weapons. That was said aloud and is recorded in secondary sources. Its written paper from the same session defined those weapons by five features a system must have all at once, including no human involvement at all, and asked only for caution. The paper contains no ban language. Both are shown, at their dates.
China defines LAWS narrowly as fully autonomous systems.
LAWS should be understood as fully autonomous lethal weapon systems
Position Paper. Submitted by China (CCW/GGE.1/2018/WP.7), 2018-04-11 source
The paper sets out the five-characteristic definition.
LAWS should include but not be limited to the following 5 basic characteristics
Position Paper. Submitted by China (CCW/GGE.1/2018/WP.7), 2018-04-11 source
The autonomy characteristic requires total absence of human involvement.
autonomy, which means absence of human intervention and control during the entire process of executing a task
Position Paper. Submitted by China (CCW/GGE.1/2018/WP.7), 2018-04-11 source
The written paper calls for precaution and contains no ban proposal.
we call on all countries to exercise precaution, and to refrain, in particular, from any indiscriminate use against civilians
Position Paper. Submitted by China (CCW/GGE.1/2018/WP.7), 2018-04-11 source
A secondary report records China's oral call for a ban and its clarification that the ban would cover use only.
China called for a ban on fully autonomous weapons, but later clarified its call was limited to use only and not development and production
Stopping Killer Robots: Country Positions on Banning Fully Autonomous Weapons and Retaining Human Control, 2020-08-10 source
Unclear or shifting (AMBIG), since 2021-12-13, interpreted (INFERRED)
Has said things that point in more than one direction.
China's 2021 position paper on military AI calls for human control and the ability to switch systems off at any time, but proposes norms and national measures rather than a treaty, and never uses the term "lethal autonomous weapons". It neither repeats nor withdraws the 2018 ban language.
The paper requires human control and suspendability without proposing a new instrument.
Relevant weapon systems must be under human control and efforts must be made to ensure human suspension at any time [zh]
Position Paper of the People's Republic of China on Regulating Military Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2021-12-13 source
Unclear or shifting (AMBIG), since 2022-08-09, stated directly (EXPLICIT)
Has said things that point in more than one direction.
China's 2022 paper supports banning systems that have all five of its features at once (lethal, fully autonomous with no possible intervention, impossible to stop, indiscriminate, self-evolving), modelled on the ban on blinding lasers, with regulation for everything else. The same paper warns that broad bans would undermine legitimate defense. Both halves are stated directly, and together they point in more than one direction.
China opposes broad prohibitions on autonomous weapons.
general prohibitions or restrictions may undermine the legitimate defense capabilities of countries, and even their rights to use relevant technologies peacefully
Working paper on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. Submitted by the People's Republic of China (CCW/GGE.1/2022/WP.6), 2022-08-09 source
China supports a legal instrument prohibiting a narrow class of systems, following the blinding-lasers model.
could consider following the example of the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons and work to reach a legal instrument to prohibit such weapons systems
Working paper on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. Submitted by the People's Republic of China (CCW/GGE.1/2022/WP.6), 2022-08-09 source
The proposed prohibition applies only to systems bearing all five characteristics, which apply cumulatively.
Autonomous weapons systems with all of the five characteristics clearly have anti-human characteristics and significant humanitarian risks
Working paper on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. Submitted by the People's Republic of China (CCW/GGE.1/2022/WP.6), 2022-08-09 source
Unclear or shifting (AMBIG), since 2024-05-23, stated directly (EXPLICIT)
China's submission to the UN Secretary-General names the Geneva convention as the right forum, makes any treaty negotiation conditional on first agreeing definitions, rejects blanket bans, and repeats the narrow ban proposal. China abstained on all three UN resolutions. The position sits between "keep it in Geneva" and a narrowly scoped treaty, and China's own words do not settle it.
China names the CCW as the appropriate forum.
the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons framework is the appropriate forum for the discussion of lethal autonomous weapons systems [zh]
Lethal autonomous weapons systems: report of the Secretary-General (A/79/88), 2024-05-23 source
China conditions negotiation of a binding instrument on first agreeing definitions and technical characteristics.
as a basis on which to formulate targeted measures and negotiate a legally binding international instrument [zh]
Lethal autonomous weapons systems: report of the Secretary-General (A/79/88), 2024-05-23 source
China rejects blanket bans in the same submission.
The introduction of blanket bans or restrictions would undermine States' legitimate defence capabilities and even their right to the peaceful use of these technologies [zh]
Lethal autonomous weapons systems: report of the Secretary-General (A/79/88), 2024-05-23 source
China restates the narrow prohibition proposal on the blinding-lasers model.
consideration should be given to concluding a legal instrument to prohibit them, following the example of the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons [zh]
Lethal autonomous weapons systems: report of the Secretary-General (A/79/88), 2024-05-23 source
How did it vote?
Abstain, Abstain, Abstain across the three resolutions.
Hover a legend chip to light those votes · each resolution links to its record
What has it signed?
Being on a list is a fact. Not being on one is not opposition.
Hover a column heading to light its signings · click a seal to open the document
When has it spoken?
Every time it went on the record, dated.
Hover a mark for what it was · a legend chip lights that type
What rules has it written at home?
Its own military policy.
No published military policy on weapon autonomy found by this site, as of 2026-08-31.
This site looked for a published Chinese policy specifically governing autonomy in weapons in three places: the 2019 defense white paper "China's National Defense in the New Era", published Central Military Commission regulations, and public PLA doctrine. The closest candidate is the white paper, which describes "intelligent warfare" as a coming trend but sets no rule for it: no requirement for human judgment, no review process, no categories. Describing a trend is not governing it. China's export controls require government approval to sell military and dual-use goods, but they govern sales, not autonomy. China's papers at the UN and in Geneva are diplomatic documents, not domestic policy, and are recorded under its position above.
The record
The documents on file.
Each mark opens its source