Problems With Killer Drones

[Eugen Leitl]

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/Problems-With-Killer-Drones-1336

Problems With Killer Drones

By John Hudson on October 19, 2009 4:12pm

The CIA's use of predator drones in Afghanistan and Pakistan has come under
intense scrutiny in a deep investigation by Jane Mayer in The New Yorker. As
we covered here, drone attacks have long been controversial. But recent
findings have sharpened the debate. According to a new study cited in the
article, President Obama has authorized as many drone attacks in his first
nine months as George W. Bush did in his final three years. Mayer describes
drone attacks as "a radically new and geographically unbounded use of
state-sanctioned lethal force" with no apparent system of accountability.

In response, dovish commentators are piling on their criticism of drone
attacks, calling them reckless and ultimately damaging to the U.S. war
effort. Others have lauded the predator drones, noting their effectiveness in
killing Al Qaeda operatives without putting U.S. lives at risk. The debate
for and against the use of unmanned verhicles includes a range of ethical,
legal and strategic arguments.

    * Increased Drone Use Raises Ethical Controversy, writes Jane Mayer in
the New Yorker. (Preview here.) "Cut off from the realities of the bombings
in Pakistan, Americans have been insulated from the human toll, as well as
the political and moral consequences...Before September 11th, the C.I.A.
refused to deploy the Predator for anything other than surveillance. Eight
years later, there is no longer any doubt that targeted killing has become
official U.S. policy...According to the New America Foundation's study, only
six of the forty-one C.I.A. drone strikes conducted by the Obama
Administration in Pakistan have targeted Al Qaeda."

    * Drones Undermine the War Effort, writes Lisa Schirch at The Huffington
Post: " Drones kill more civilians than insurgents. The Brookings Institution
estimated in July 2009 that a ratio of ten civilians die for every militant
killed in a drone strike," she writes. "High civilian casualty rates,
particularly from US unilateral military maneuvers, undermine both Pakistani
and Afghan state sovereignty and legitimacy, stir political unrest, and
challenge alliances ... The tactic of using unmanned drone strikes should be
taken off the table."

    * An Ironic Strategy for a Nobel Laureate, writes Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
at Anti War Blog: "Seems like President Barack Obama -- Nobel Peace Laureate
Obama - has taken his predecessor's predator drone program and jacked it up
with steroids... And the Republicans were worried that he wouldn't be man
enough."

    * Legally Defensible, writes Kenneth Anderson at The Volokh Conspiracy:
"The administration, in my view, ought to take a far more vigorous approach
to defending the full lawfulness of that campaign, as well as other
operations that the US might undertake, whether via the CIA or military
special ops or a combination."

    * Either Way, Drones Are Shaping Obama's Afghan Strategy, writes Jake
Tapper at ABC News: "Obama administration officials have been proud of the
fact that largely because of better intelligence, unmanned Predator drone
strikes against Taliban and al Qaeda forces in Pakistan have been more
successful in the first eight months of President Obama's presidency than in
the previous two years combined."