Targeted Killing by the US in Pakistan

Be like Nutella

I came across a paper on this a while back and got very p1ssed off.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2011/5/5/1304607891093/Unmanned-MQ-1-Predator-dr-007.jpg

Basically you've probably heard about the use of Predator Drones (above) to kill various targets mostly in Pakistan as part of the 'War on Terror'.. or GWOT as they call it now in Washington. Well what you probably don't know is the scale of this program, the facts and stats and you are probably also unaware of the possible international illegality of the entire thing. I put up a petition on Change.org which has links to basically all you'd need to understand the issue if anyone's interested it's here:

http://www.change.org/petitions/international-community-united-nations-and-united-states-congress-make-targeted-killing-internationally-accountable

Here's a quick few facts:

- The US has carried out over 300 Predator Drone attacks in Pakistan since 2004.
- Killing between 2000 and 3000 people.
- These people were either Al Qaeda, Taliban, Militants of various sorts or Civilians including at least 150 children according to a credible report (listed in the sources in the link above)
- Unless the GWOT allows the US to categorize the entire globe as a battlefield then Pakistan is not one and therefore these strikes are illegal.
- These strikes are carried out using Predator UAVs which are controlled from all the way back in the US mainland by pilots who sit behind desks in flight suits watching screens and using a joystick.
- There have been scores of terrorists killed including Al Qaeda planners and operatives who have been targeted on the basis of presenting a credible risk i.e. that they would in the future take part in attacks on the US or its troops.
- This program was virtually unknown by the public and ignored or unreported upon by the worlds media for years until the number of attacks was severely ramped up under Obama who specifically supported this program.
- There are various think tanks and organisations who have conducted investigations into this Drone War and have produced some lengthy reports (linked in the petition above)
- Although these investigations do not produce the same statistics it is clear that hundreds and quite possibly more than 1000 civilians have been killed by these Predator's Hellfire Missiles since June 2004
- While all these facts are shocking especially when one considers that the US is not welcome in Pakistan and is not at war with Pakistan and that the Pakistani public DO NOT want them there the most angering issue is the complete and total LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY around this program both within the US government, to it's Public and more importantly to the International Community who watches on silently but worryingly.
- There is no Oversight to speak of in congress and as the CIA has taken control of this program it has almost entirely up to now refused to 'confirm of deny' the existence of Drone Strikes in Pakistan at all! and as a result the only information in the press has been provided by controlled leaks from Langley and the DOD.
- All of this amounts to a 'Trust US' policy and as we are talking about the extrajudicial assassination of thousands of people, a large portion of which are completely innocent Pakistani Civilians, the 'Trust US' policy is certainly unacceptable to the Pakistani people, the US population and to us all in the International Community.
- Therefore we should be talking about this more in the media and in our parliaments and with our US diplomats and demand that the US attempt to meet rational levels of International Accountability and so stop the future risk of it or any other nation taking it upon themselves to emulate the same practice in other locations around the world Russia, China etc.. as this would create a very chaotic and dangerous situation with dyer consequences on all levels.

Yeah it's a bit of a rant but if anyone would like to argue or debate or make a point then fire away. I certainly don't have all the info or understand all the issues at play here. It just p1sses me off as I say !

troposphere

They were flying drones out of a base in Shamsi Airfield in Pakistan up until recently. The Pakistani military was fighting in the tribal areas. The Pakistani's receive billions of funding from the US. Top level members of Al Qaeda have been killed or captured on Pakistani soil. Northwest Pakistan is used as a safe haven for groups operating in Afghanistan.

Pakistan Chief of Army Kayani from Wikileaks

11. (C) Referring to the situation in Waziristan, Kayani asked if Fallon could assist in providing continuous Predator coverage of the conflict area. Fallon regretted that he did not have the assets to support this request, but offered Joint Tactical Aircraft Controller (JTAC) support for Pakistani aircraft. Kayani demurred, saying that having U.S. JTACs on the ground would not be politically acceptable. Fallon then offered JTAC training for Pakistani troops. After a brief discussion on the complexity of building a night-capable, air-to-ground capability in the Pakistani Army, Kayani conceded Pakistan could not currently undertake such a big project.

ISLAMABAD: In the ongoing war on terrorism the armed forces have so far lost the equivalent of two full brigades. Among those killed were one three-star and a couple of two-star generals.

Briefing defence committees of the two houses of parliament at General Headquarters on Tuesday (partly reported in Dawn on Wednesday), Director-General of Military Operations Maj-Gen Ashfaq Nadeem said that 3,097 personnel had been killed and 721 others permanently disabled.

The total number of Pakistanis killed in the conflict has gone up to 40,309. Maj-Gen Nadeem said the Inter-Services Intelligence alone had lost 63 personnel in various incidents, including attacks on its major stations.

Since 2007, he said, more than 140,000 armed forces personnel had been deployed along the Afghan border.

DAWN

Victor

Be like Nutella wrote: »

- While all these facts are shocking especially when one considers that the US is not welcome in Pakistan and is not at war with Pakistan and that the Pakistani public DO NOT want them there the most angering issue is the complete and total LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY around this program both within the US government, to it's Public and more importantly to the International Community who watches on silently but worryingly.

Yes, the programme has worrying aspects, but the Taliban and their allies are running a war in Afghanistan. Legally, they aren't entitled to immunity in Pakistan simply by border hopping. Pakistan as a neutral (but aligned) party has a legal obligation to prevent the Taliban from using it's territory. In default of upholding its neutrality, NATO is entitled to attack the Taliban in Pakistan.

Perhaps a petition to the Taliban to stop using Pakistan to mount attacks in Afghanistan?

Be like Nutella wrote: »

the Pakistani public DO NOT want them there

Well, the Pakistani government is allowing them there. If it was otherwise, Pakistan would be shooting down the drones.

Be like Nutella

" Taliban and their allies are running a war in Afghanistan. Legally, they aren't entitled to immunity in Pakistan simply by border hopping "

I absolutely agree. I think anyone who can should be after them wherever they go.. hell I'd try and catch one if I had an opportunity to do so they're ba$tards lot of them (or in some cases highly ignorant and taken advantage of) and their own country men don't want them in power.


"Well, the Pakistani government is allowing them there. If it was otherwise, Pakistan would be shooting down the drones. "

True although that's very short hand tbh you and I both know well that it's a fiercely complex and poorly understood area i.e. who's in control in Pakistan and the billions in american military aid issue and the corruption issue and the ISI issue and the chaotic internal strife issue etc etc


I have no problem with CATCHING OR TRYING TO CATCH bad people doing bad things whether that's AQ or Taliban - two clearly BAD organisations. The end goal is to prevent the BAD people doing BAD things.. and to military folk that's all they see - the end goal. Remove the BAD people from the equation - get the job done - make X,Y,Z safer.. badabing badaboom.

However - for a moment let's ignore military objectives and methodology and whether me or you could conceivably understand the international legal issues involved ENOUGH to have a worthy argument (which I am very much assuming we don't seeing as there are AG's and class actions and college professors debating these things in this space for the last decade without much clarity or resolution having been attained from all of it). So, the question you have to ask yourself (rather than try and convince me or anyone else here) is;

Is it 'right' to attempt to tele-assassinate an individual on a very broadly targeted 'kill/capture list' using a robotic flying drone controlled from thousands of miles away when you know well that in doing so will cause the deaths of innocent unarmed women, elderly and children? AND importantly in an area and in such a fashion as to NOT allow you to investigate the aftermath of said strike therefore increasing the already existing probability of error even further. AND not only is it right to carry out such an INDIVIDUAL KILL but to set up and operate a program of such KILLS between the DOD and CIA and JUSTICE DEPT in a way that is provably non transparent and unaccountable and suffers minimal if any OVERSIGHT by US Congress who should be waist deep in this thing 24/7 to make sure it isn't abused or misused and performs as prescribed achieving a well defined set of goals which are constantly legally and MORALLY vetted by voted representatives of the people? and that's all one single question if it was in any way intelligible to you.

I can describe a situation where a drone kill order is the 'right' thing to do in my mind but it is a very very specific and extreme set or circumstances and the vast majority of the 300 or more strikes carried out in the FATA region of Pakistan WOULD NOT fit that hypothetical scenario. That the boots on the ground scenario is a difficult one to sell to the US public or Pakistani government is not a valid part of this argument that tries to justify these 300 immoral robotic air strikes... just because something is easier (and in this case soooooooooooo much easier) doesn't make it the right choice but again to a military indoctrinated/thinking individual the 'easiness' is simply 'superior practicality' and to the politically indoctrinated i.e. Obama and his AG and Brennan and extreme right reps see 'easy' as 'right' because it means that they CAN do it and the lack of media coverage for a whole host of obvious reasons when it comes to drone kills MAKES them do it coz they can't possibly turn down the political opportunity... it's basic political economics, but alas it's so fukcing wrong it's sickening. Hey might sound gay but whatever - check out the lyrics to a song I made:

Why do we blow these Pakistani people up?
With our robotic drones is this a score we got to even up?
What are we trying to achieve here?
Terrorizing them the way we accuse THEM of? when all WE leave is fear
We kill their brothers and mothers and fathers
creating vengeful jihadists out to become martyrs
This strategy has got to change.. it's so deranged
and it's illegal and worst of all they do it in our names!
This War on Terror's not a war.. not in the traditional sense
man it's just violence breeding more violence
It's not between The West and Islam, Good or bad..
these deluded Terrorists believe in their jihad
We ain't gona change anything by killing their daughters
with hellfire missiles direct from General Petraeus orders
How can there be an end to this insanity
if we see it as something so black'n'white like Sean Hannity
We need to inject some humanity in this mess
And don't tell me that 'Signature strikes' are due process
Tell that to the dead Pakistani children's father
tell him not to strap that vest on and go become a martyr
Tell that to the mother holding her headless child
that just so happened to be in the way of our Hellfire missile
Tell that to the Pakistani Public,
Who suffer suicide bombings now as a direct result of it
While we pay their corrupt military billions
to let us hunt these guys down
while we blow up their civilians
There's got to be a better way ..
this is not how a democratic leaders supposed to behave
It's not reflective of our values ... not who we are
Jocks with joysticks fly these kill missions from afar
Bullsh1t fear mongering gets terror-bills passed
But this **** is not war.. it's just murder, en masse.

SamHarris

Im always confused as to why people feel killing is "worse", or more notworthy, because they are on a list? It should logically follow that if violence during war is more discrimanatory it is morally more valid.

Is it the same kind of thinking that caused the semi uproar over Osama Bin Ladin being killed, whilst many people are killed every day in more routine military actions without the same anger? Forget military actions, even by police everywhere - for example when the Jihadist in France was killed after a stand off with police it was not even commented on a wide scale as immoral. The scale is massivley increased with regard to OBL and his ilk, again it should follow that thee response should be stronger to match.

Or, perhaps more frequently, why people are so terrified by the idea of drones doing something that manned planes have been able to do for decades? Yes it is awful that civilians are killed, but the rate is much lower for such attacks than for comparable statistics on something as comprable as even manned bombing runs. Is it the robotic nature of the weapon? That people are far removed? Its interesting how ancient that view is (it was held about the longbow, the fire arm, the rapid firing fire arm, artillery etc etc).

Again, being against war per se is perfectly legitamite, however to say that this form is particularly insidious seems to not hold up under scrutiny when one teases out what is objectionable in modern conflict.

With regard to them being carried out in Pakistan and therefore being illegal (not that its legality really matters to people that hold to this view, the legality of the Afghan war never seems to make it less objectionable in their eyes) a country only has rights to territorial integrity IF it controls the land they lay claim to. Pakistan does not.

Be like Nutella

Appreciate the perspective, and in many ways I agree with your rationale as it is undeniably logical IF the use of drones WAS just like using any other weapons and in THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION.

Unfortunately it is not... drones are not like any other weapons platforms and the whole 'drone thing' irreversibly shifts everything into a whole new paradigm, one I might add which is not covered it seems well enough by the laws of conflict and international human rights laws but let's not complicate things for a moment.

The ease at which a drone strike can be carried out is a major problem on its own. Especially when the CIA whose business is legally supposed to be intelligence and not Special Ops moves into this space and is by its nature unaccountable (which is a situation that came about by conscious choice and provably so)

What does accountability mean in this case?
very simply...
what are you doing?
where are you doing it?
is it moral?
did congress discuss it?
is there an oversight committee from the get-go?
and are your actions in tune with the values of the people in your democratic system (let alone in the wider international community)

and the answer is - nobody knows.. and this is a completely illegal, unacceptable situation and one which closed down the infamous PHOENIX PROGRAM back in the time of Vietnam.

Do I trust that Drones are used as other weapons systems are used and with the same type of decision structure within the same military objective mind frame as in other wars or conflicts etc? No I do not and the fact that the CIA/DOD/Just Dept combo which runs this black ops drone game HAVE NOT AND WILL NOT open the books on this thing is a MAJOR problem, democratically and legally and in every way you like. The next issue and I'm not going to recount the whole argument again is that the WHOLE THING is POLITICAL... in a sickening way. It is EASY to do the DRONE THING and nobody asks questions because men are not at risk... the political capital is minor and the political gain IMMENSE (possibly ultimately election deciding). This is also a major problem and don't spit that 'everything is political' coz in this case it is very clearly and identifiably political in that as gung ho as that retard Bush was Obama came in and instantly went to Drone War - drastically increasing strikes as it was 'his baby'... him and his exec team created the decision framework and made it streamlined and literally unaccountable and as secret as possible in that the CIA who 'owned the whole thing and all the drones' never admitted it and everybody involved played the can't confirm/deny card waaaaay beyond an acceptable limit but the press gave them carte blanche because as I said no lives were at risk = no headlines. If you have any interest in actually listening to a verrrry comprehensive argument on the issue, as eloquent and logical as your points are this guy has the specifics, the data, the dates, the locations, the strike figures and the moral and legal arguments to back it up... check it out. I don't care if you come around to my anti-drone position... this is educational and eye opening on its own, I recommend it.. and if you do watch it (it isn't short:) I'd love to hear your views on it.

Predators, Reapers and post-heroic war - Professor Christian Enemark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLBDqy6pj28

SamHarris

I'll post more tomorrow (I better hit the hay, got work in the morning) but with regard to there not being proper rules to follow in an international sense with this new technology it has and will continue to be a large failing of international law that it is always retrosepctive. Thats not a defense, merely an observation that has held true since the begining of the formalistation of "rules of war". Here is a good podcast actually that runs through the run up to WW2 and how there were so many failings in regulation for how to "properly" use warplanes (which obviously had enromous negative consequences).

It deals with other things to, which Im sure you'll find at least interesting). http://www.dancarlin.com/disp.php/hharchive
The "Logical Insanity" episode is the one.