iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Neta C. Crawford

GET UPDATES FROM Neta C. Crawford
 

'Targeted' Drones Strikes and Magical Thinking

Posted: 09/23/2012 3:00 pm

As we enter year twelve of the "war on terror," drones are arguably the coolest tool in the American military arsenal. There is a breathless tone in describing these machines that loiter for hours, then fire Hellfire missiles at remote targets. But just below the gee-wiz is a simmering debate over the secrecy and legality of their strikes in Pakistan and Yemen.

There is so much rhetorical action amid the dazzle and we are so busy listening to the patter that we may miss the sleight of hand under way. We are told the strikes are secret, and at the same time that they are perfect. The Pentagon and CIA refuse to acknowledge their existence and usually won't answer questions about the program, though President Obama defended the strikes in a Google Plus forum.

We know there have been more than 270 drone strikes targeting insurgents and militant leaders in Pakistan and Yemen since 2002. The U.S. has more than tripled drone strikes this year in Yemen. Anonymous sources leak the names of the militants killed. And Congress holds hearings on who leaks all this.

We are assured that the targeted killing program is legal with its legality resting firmly on three grounds.

  • First, drone strikes are closely monitored by the president, who says, we are not killing people "willy nilly." President Obama says,"It is important for everybody to understand that this thing is kept on a very tight leash. It's not a bunch of folks in a room somewhere just making decisions."
  • Second, we are assured that the executive branch has all the legal authority it needs and that Congress has authorized it as, says Obama, "part and parcel of our overall authority when it comes to battling al-Qaeda." And the courts, we are told, have no business getting into the details, even when American citizens are named as targets and killed.
  • Third, we are told the strikes satisfy the laws of war. According to Obama's counterterrorism tsar, John Brennan: "Targeted strikes conform to the principle of proportionality, the notion that the anticipated collateral damage of an action cannot be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage."

This final assertion is the key to the drone strike debate -- the contention that drones have astonishing precision, yielding little "collateral damage" civilian killing or injury. "It's this surgical precision," Brennan has argued, "the ability, with laser-like focus, to eliminate the cancerous tumor called an al-Qaida terrorist while limiting damage to the tissue around it, that makes this counterterrorism tool so essential."

Obama told the Google audience that drones have "not caused a huge number" of civilian casualties. Sen. Diane Feinstein said the number of civilian casualties have gone down. Drones, we are told, dramatically reduce the danger to innocent civilians, yet neither the Bush nor Obama administrations have been precise about the numbers of civilians killed. They've said at times "fewer than 20" or "single digits."

The equation of precision with few civilian casualties is the sleight of hand. While we marvel at the technology, see reporters get rebuffed when they ask about the not-so-secret program, get assured of the strikes' legality as our system of checks and balances is derided, and even debate minutia such as whether the remote pilots of drones are really pilots, we overlook the disappearance of civilian bodies from the scene of the strikes.

Estimates of civilians killed and injured by drones vary widely. The New America Foundation and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, put it in the hundreds while Pakistani sources say as many as 2,000 civilians have may have been killed and injured since 2004 in Waziristan. The same fog exists with regard to the numbers of civilians harmed in Yemen. The conservative web site Long War Journal, counts more than 130 civilians killed in Pakistan and more than 50 Yemeni civilians killed in U.S. strikes.

But the people of Pakistan and Yemen can't lose sight of the civilian dead and wounded. The intention/assertion of distinction and proportionality is not its fact. And the cruel irony of waging a hearts-and-mind strategy which puts civilian protection at its core in Iraq and Afghanistan, while denying the harm to civilians in Pakistan and Yemen, is not lost in those countries.

In July, the U.S. Army released a new "Civilian Casualty Mitigation" manual. It argues that civilian casualties lead to "ill will," undermine U.S. legitimacy, and diminish the likelihood of military success. Among the tools to maintain and regain that legitimacy, according to the Army, is to investigate incidents of civilian harm, acknowledge when civilian casualties occur at U.S. hands, and tell the truth.

It took years for the U.S. to acknowledge that civilian casualties were not only a grave concern to Afghans and Iraqis, but were also hurting the U.S. war efforts. Generals admitted that for every civilian killed, a number of insurgents were born and attacks on U.S. soldiers grew. It is time that the U.S. apply these lessons from Afghanistan and Iraq to the not-so-secret, not-so-legal, and probably not-so-precise drone war.

Neta C. Crawford, a political science professor at Boston University, was co-director of the "Cost of War" project and is author of a forthcoming book about collateral damage.

 
FOLLOW WORLD
As we enter year twelve of the "war on terror," drones are arguably the coolest tool in the American military arsenal. There is a breathless tone in describing these machines that loiter for hours, t...
As we enter year twelve of the "war on terror," drones are arguably the coolest tool in the American military arsenal. There is a breathless tone in describing these machines that loiter for hours, t...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 323
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
09:20 PM on 09/24/2012
The article forgot to mention one very pertinent point; namely, that EVERY male Muslim age 16 and over is, BY DEFINITION, a terrorist. To our great leader's credit, Obama DID say that, if killed, it is possible for the boy to be recognized as a non-terrorist. Wow! What a relief. And this mentality is already hear in Crazyland (aka USA). A journalist who has an inside connection with a potential terrorist can be designated as a terrorist. The use of drones has killed hundreds of real terrorists- hundreds at a price of as much as $30m per drone. And we have thousands of drones. Figure it out folks- this is not about killing a even 1000 real terrorists as much as it is about feeding the MIC war machine. We have CREATED many more terroists than we have killed. The MIC has the perfect war- it never ends. Obama seems to have a heart in many ways. But when it comes to international policy on terrorism, he makes GWB look like a sweet kid. There is no habeus corpus- no jury. Obama has totally trashed that part of the U.S. Constitution.
12:19 AM on 09/25/2012
Yes he has, alienprof. That's the worst part of all this. Obama has one-upped Bush in this regard. What a dubious honor indeed.
08:54 PM on 09/24/2012
Obama's policy of assasination using drone's is about the only gutsy military/ political thing that he has not waffled on in his presidency. He is mortified at the prospect of another terrorist attack on our soil, so has taken this aggressive posture on death from the sky for suspected terrorists. Unfortunately, the well co-ordinated, planned attack on our consulate in Libya was not prevented by the drone program. You can't get 'enm all, but the drone assasinations have gotten quite a few who would do us more harm
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fatherofbarmitzvah
05:38 AM on 09/25/2012
Really? This makes you feel safe? Since each kill produces more "suspected terrorists" the killing will never end. Primitive and uncivilized you are. Let's see how it works long term.
08:09 PM on 09/24/2012
Why send a drone when a B52 is much more precise.
07:24 PM on 09/24/2012
Like Bush looking for weapons of mass destruction that he lied to us about at the Correspondence Dinner I found President Obama joking about armed drones to be telling. I'll defend President Obama's economic policies but on his heavy handedness about civil liberties and human rights all I see is the continuation of Bush's policies.
photo
imdesign
Expression is Everything.
06:59 PM on 09/24/2012
Drone warfare is terror attacks from a distance.....now at least.

They are being used and the military and government hope is that the community, at least on the side who uses them, will buy into their use. Hey they save our lives, they're safe, safe?? and they only kill bad people, or those who we deem are bad people.

And soon we'll be presented with even more "benefits" of using this weaponry.

Robots could be the next big recruits for the military. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) debuted a new version of its pack mule robot, designed to shoulder up to 400 pounds of supplies. It can follow visual and oral commands.

The robot can currently trot at a speed of 1- to 3-mph over rocky terrain, and can right itself if tipped over. Most importantly, the bot can take orders.

DARPA also announced its Cheetah robot reached 28.3 mph running on a treadmill, making it the fastest legged robot in history.

DARPA is working on triggering genes that will make soldiers' bodies able to convert fat into energy more efficiently so they are able to go days without eating while in the warzone.

Tomorrow's soldiers could be able to run at Olympic speeds and will be able to go for days without food or sleep, if new research into gene manipulation is successful.

Is this our tomorrow President Obama? You're the right man ok, but we need answers, not soft sell.
photo
Unca Wiggilie
I am but a meager bookworm...
06:36 PM on 09/24/2012
YOUR "Magiacl Thinking"? - NOT!
Duh, Wars cost money and Obama is a war criminal? Is that your agenda?
This whole very post has become nothing but a haven for reactionary anti-Obama ideologues
spewing their hate filled lies and propaganda.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MacTheCat
Those Clouds You See Aren't really clouds at all
05:59 PM on 09/24/2012
It's always easier to dance around the core of this policy with 'legal' justifications (always open to being overridden by the next court!) than to deal with the fact that the Constitution makes no exception for unilateral preemptive war, especially without the full War Powers of Congress being invoked.
12:24 AM on 09/25/2012
Absolutely correct macthecat. Advocates of this misguided policy can find many supporters among the general population, but not in the constitution.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
A ScottMiller
05:50 PM on 09/24/2012
There should be some kind of petition on change.org associated with this. Should be part of the article. I don't want to have to go look for it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:15 PM on 09/24/2012
We need to get our troops home.

Gary Johnson 2012
03:40 PM on 09/24/2012
With all the money spent on the war effort, we should would be wise to spend what amounts to a decimal fraction of our total cost and do what members of Al-Qaeda do to win over recruits, and pay damages to those civilians who's homes and material belongings have been damaged by our strikes taking responsibility and, for a very low cost, buying ourselves immeasurable good will. For a nation that are masters of advertising and media manipulation, we seem to be doing an extremely incompetent job at spending our dollars where it counts - winning the hearts and changing perceptions though media messaging and salesmanship on the ground in those areas. Media is so cheap in those countries that we could create our own network and blanket the airwaves with our own disinformation instead.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marie9
Selp appointed critic for the good!
02:59 PM on 09/24/2012
This was a very excellent article. I have always been against drone attacks, period. Someone sitting in a room thousands of miles away from the target is just not reasonable for limiting collateral damage.

Some of the users may even look at it as a "war game," a few extra innocent people killed, it happens. It's hard to put humanity in to drones.

I am sure we are not told the truth about the real number of deaths, it's just not the CIA' s way.

I believe, drones have had a very negative trend on attitudes of the people in the countries affected by the hits, after all they know the real number of deaths.

Some technology is not all good,
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MacTheCat
Those Clouds You See Aren't really clouds at all
02:50 PM on 09/24/2012
Why won't any of the defenders of this policy respond to the question of drone attacks by other nations in America and what their legality would be, let alone their morality, and how THAT is the issue with these attacks we commit?
12:28 AM on 09/25/2012
Macthecat, this country by and large has a terminal case of "it's-ok-if-the-USA-does-it" syndrome. Arguments like those you present fall on deaf ears with this crowd.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MacTheCat
Those Clouds You See Aren't really clouds at all
11:38 AM on 09/25/2012
They are militarists and support the empire.
iridium53
Semper Fi
02:12 PM on 09/24/2012
Your incredible disregard for the safety of military personnel is offensive.

Almost as offensive and despicable as the Republicans in the Senate, last Wednesday, rejecting help for Veterans getting Jobs.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MacTheCat
Those Clouds You See Aren't really clouds at all
01:41 PM on 09/24/2012
Posters on the right here, still insist on walking around the morality of this issue.

They won't respond to the question of drone attacks by other nations in America and their legality, let alone their morality, and THAT is the issue with these attacks we commit.

Easier to dance around the core of it with 'legal' justifications (always open to being overridden by the next court!) than to deal with the fact that the Constitution makes no exception for unilateral preemptive war, especially without the full War Powers of Congress being invoked.

These strikes are both illegal, and immoral.

America has ceded the high moral ground and no longer stands for what I was raised to believe this country was about.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:24 PM on 09/24/2012
But bear in mind it is not Left or Right is is our Government Left and Right Republican and Democrat. Vote responsible government Libertarian.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MacTheCat
Those Clouds You See Aren't really clouds at all
06:00 PM on 09/24/2012
Both parties are wholly owned subsidiaries of the MIC and Wall Street.
08:49 PM on 09/25/2012
Unfortunately it ceded the moral high ground about 65 years ago with the Dresden and Hiroshma/ Nagasaki bombings, and has been running from that high ground like a rabid bat out of hell ever since.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:39 PM on 09/24/2012
we're all hamsters on neocon "financially engineered" "financially innovated" and "politically manipulated" wheels

4/21/2012

"With little public attention,

dozens of universities

and law-enforcement agencies

have been given approval by federal aviation regulators

to use unmanned aircraft known as drones...

The more than 50 institutions that received approvals to operate remotely piloted aircraft are

more varied than many outsiders and privacy experts previously knew.

They include not only agencies such as the

Department of Homeland inSecurity

but also smaller ones such as the

police departments in

North Little Rock, Ark., and

Ogden, Utah,

as well the

University of North Dakota and

Nicholls State University in Louisiana.

By the fall of 2015, Congress wants the agency to

integrate remotely piloted aircraft throughout U.S. airspace."

"Many drones are designed to carry surveillance equipment,

including video cameras,

infrared thermal imagers,

radar and

wireless network 'sniffers,' "

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304331204577354331959335276.html#

if the police in North Little Rock, Ark. are deploying drones, for who knows what in that hot bed of criminal activity,

you can be certain every revenue starved police department and university is lining up at the dept of Homeland inSecurity for

drone $$$$$

to better spy on the public

the MIC is laughing all the way to the bank!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MacTheCat
Those Clouds You See Aren't really clouds at all
03:00 PM on 09/24/2012
And so are their bosses on Wall Street and at the Bank of England.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marie9
Selp appointed critic for the good!
03:05 PM on 09/24/2012
It's very scary, soon this will be a police country, with limited civilian freedoms. The jails are overflowing with petty criminals, and the major felons go free continuing their destruction of the country.
08:51 PM on 09/25/2012
This is a police state already, and as you say, the monstrous felons are the ones pulling the strings and obliterating what once was a real nation.