Free to Kill: How a Lack of Accountability in America's Drone Campaign
Threatens U.S. Efforts in Yemen
The drone campaign in Yemen is creating unintended consequences that are
counterproductive in the fight against AQAP.
By Jacqueline Manning
Senior Editor
December 10, 2012
Earlier this year White House counter-terrorism advisor, John Brennan, named
al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) in Yemen the
<
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/officials-fear-terrorists-body-bombs-us-bound
-planes/story?id=16245827#.UKrhzLT3D-k.> greatest threat to the U.S.
<
http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/sites/newamerica.net/files/policydoc
s/bergentiedemann2.pdf> Since 2009, the Obama administration has carried out
an estimated 28 drone strikes and 13 air strikes targeting AQAP in Yemen,
while the Yemeni Government has carried out 17 strikes, and another five
strikes cannot be definitively attributed to either state . There is an
ongoing debate over the effectiveness of targeted killings by drone strikes
in the fight against al-Qaeda. However, what is clear is that the secrecy
and unaccountability with which these drone strike are being carried out are
undermining U.S. efforts in Yemen.
The drone campaign in Yemen is widely criticized by human rights activists,
the local population and even the United Nations for its resulting civilian
casualties. It is also credited with
<
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1022040263?accountid=11243> fostering
animosity towards the U.S. and swaying public sentiment in Yemen in favor of
AQAP. The long-term effects, as detailed by a
<
http://civiliansinconflict.org/uploads/files/publications/The_Civilian_Impa
ct_of_Drones_w_cover.pdf> 2012 report by the Center for Civilians in
Conflict, seem to be particularly devastating. The resulting loss of life,
disability, or loss of property of a bread-winner can have long-term
impacts, not just on an individual, but on an entire family of dependents.
The effectiveness of drone technology in killing al-Qaeda militants,
however, cannot be denied. Targeted killings by drone strikes have
eliminated <
http://www.gwumc.edu/hspi/policy/drones.pdf> several key AQAP
members such as Anwar al-Awlaki, Samir Khan, Abdul Mun'im Salim al Fatahani,
and Fahd al-Quso . Advocates of the counterterrorism strategy point out that
it is much less costly in terms of human lives and money than other military
operations.
While there are strong arguments on both sides of the drone debate, both
proponents and critics of targeted killings of AQAP operatives by drones
agree that transparency and accountability are needed.
Authorizing the CIA to carry out signature strikes is of particular concern.
In signature strikes, instead of targeting individual Al Qaeda leaders, the
CIA targets locations without knowing the precise identity of the
individuals targeted as long as the locations are linked to a "signature" or
pattern of behavior by Al Qaeda officials observed over time. This arbitrary
method of targeting often results in avoidable human casualties.
Secrecy surrounding the campaign often means that victims and families of
victims receive no acknowledgement of their losses, much less compensation.
There are also huge disparities in the reported number of deaths. In
addition, according to The New York Times, Obama administration officials
define "militants" as "all military-age males in a strike zone...unless
there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent" This
definition leads to a lack of accountability for those casualties and
inflames anti-American sentiment.
In a report submitted to the UN Human Rights Council, Ben Emmerson, special
rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering
terrorism, <
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1022040263?accountid=11243>
asserted that, "Human rights abuses have all too often contributed to the
grievances which cause people to make the wrong choices and to resort to
terrorism..human rights compliant counter-terrorism measures help to prevent
the recruitment of individuals to acts of terrorism." There is now
statistical evidence that supports this claim. A 2010 opinion poll conducted
by the New America Foundation in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas
(FATA) of Pakistan, where U.S. drone strikes have been carried out on a much
larger scale, shows an overwhelming opposition to U.S. drone strikes coupled
with a majority support for suicide attacks on U.S. forces under some
circumstances.
It is clear that the drone debate is not simply a matter of morality and
human rights; it is also a matter of ineffective tactics. At a minimum the
U.S. must implement a policy of transparency and accountability in the use
of drones. Signature strikes take unacceptable risks with innocent lives.
Targets must be identified more responsibly, and risks of civilian
casualties should be minimized. When civilian casualties do occur, the
United States must not only acknowledge them, but also pay amends to
families of the victims.
The debate over the strategic effectiveness of drones in countering al-Qaeda
will continue. However, whether or not the tactic is effective, the elements
of secrecy and unaccountability are creating unintended consequences that
are counterproductive in the fight against AQAP in Yemen.
Jacqueline Manning is a first year master's student at the Elliott School of
International Affairs. Before coming to the Elliott School, she spent a year
working for a media company in Yemen. She is an editor for the International
Affairs Review Journal print edition and on-line edition. Contact:
jsm39_at_gwu.edu
------------[ Sent via the dehai-wn mailing list by dehai.org]--------------
Received on Mon Dec 10 2012 - 08:06:52 EST
