Pros and Cons of Using Large Language Models (LLMs) in National Security

LLMs present promising tools for enhancing operational efficiency and data handling in national security. Their shortcomings in reliability, strategic reasoning, and the ethical implications of influence operations underscore the necessity for cautious and well-regulated usage.

Pros

1. Operational Efficiency and Data Processing:  

Large Language Models (LLMs) are recognized for quickly processing and summarizing vast amounts of unstructured data, streamlining operations in national security environments. This efficiency enables analysts to concentrate on more complex tasks instead of organizing data.

2. Enhanced Decision Support:  

Proponents argue that LLMs can assist decision-makers by providing historical insights and identifying patterns across large datasets, which might be overwhelming for human operators alone. This capability could offer a significant strategic advantage, particularly in intelligence and strategic planning.

3. Cost Efficiency for Psychological Operations:  

LLMs present a scalable and cost-effective alternative for information influence campaigns, potentially replacing more labor-intensive human efforts in psychological operations (psyops). Utilizing LLMs could strengthen national influence without requiring extensive resources.

Cons

1. Lack of Reliability in Chaotic and HighStakes Environments:  

Critics point out that LLMs cannot generate reliable probability estimates in unpredictable situations like warfare. Unlike meteorology, grounded in physics and dependable data, military decision-making encounters the "fog of war," rendering LLM outputs unpredictable and risky.

2. Bias and Hallucinations:  

LLMs can produce "hallucinations"—pieces of misleading or incorrect information—without any inherent means to verify their accuracy. This limitation is especially concerning in national security contexts, where decisions based on false data could result in catastrophic consequences.

3. Ethical Concerns Regarding Influence Operations:  

Using LLMs to influence operations raises ethical questions, mainly about whether the technology is employed to mislead or manipulate foreign populations. Critics argue that this undermines democratic values and has the potential to damage international relations, even if it serves national interests.

4. Limitations in Strategic Reasoning:  

LLMs primarily analyze historical data and may need help formulating innovative strategies for unprecedented situations. Military strategy often requires intuition and adaptability—qualities that LLMs lack, limiting their suitability for high-level strategic decision-making.

5. Risk of Adversarial Use and Escalation:  

There are concerns that adversarial nations may exploit LLMs in cyber operations, including disinformation campaigns or psychological warfare, potentially leading to escalated AI-based conflicts. Robust countermeasures would be necessary to mitigate these risks.