RSS
Home
Obama orders more drone attacks since taking office than Bush did in 3 years
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
President Barack Obama has ordered more drone attacks since taking office than George W. Bush did during his entire two terms. Despite having been elected on a platform promising peace and a turn away from the unilateral, aggressive policies that defined the Bush Cheney years, Obama has actually expanded the use of unmanned aerial drones in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
There are two drone programs running concurrently: the overt United States military drone program in Afghanistan, in support of combat operations in Afghanistan, and the covert CIA program aimed at disrupting Taliban and Al Queda activity in the nebulous border area encompassing both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
While the issue of drone attacks has been subordinated in the discussion surrounding a possible escalation of the ground war in Afghanistan, the effect of these drone strikes on the populations of both nations cannot be overstated. The use of these weapons in Pakistan, a nuclear armed country with which we are not officially at war, merits greater attention.
Number of strikes
Obama has ordered at minimum 40 drone attacks inside Pakistan since taking office, more than the total Bush ordered during the last three years he was in office.
Civilian casualties
From both a moral and tactical standpoint, the number of innocent civilians killed in the round the clock drone strikes in Pakistan is the most troubling issue. Information concerning civilian deaths is difficult to obtain, as the CIA runs its operation in Pakistan with the utmost secrecy. Reporters and aid organizations are also barred from entering the area in question, making accurate information exceptionally difficult to come by.
In fact, as official policy, CIA officials do not comment on the ongoing drone war in Western Pakistan.
However, low estimates by organizations friendly to the United States military place the number of civilian deaths at ten percent of the total killed.
Other organizations estimate as many as over 600 civlians killed in a three year period between 2006 and 2009, including 385 people in 2008 alone, of which only 12 were the intended targets. Some experts have estimated that the efficacy rate of these drone attacks is as low as 2, 8, or 12 percent.
Despite Obama's recent Nobel Peace Prize win, he seems little concerned with waging peace in Pakistan.
An attack in the South Waziristan region of Pakistan on Tuesday, October 27,2009, left as many as sixty civilians dead.
International Law
United Nations human rights investigator Philip Alston has questioned the legality of the approach employed by the US military, approaching Obama to warn him of possible violations of international law. Philip Alston, among many other international law commentators, have noted that use of unmanned aerial drones may amount to arbitrary execution, which is banned under international law.
Opposition from Population
The citizens of Pakistan are opposed to the continued use of drone strikes within their country. Though their suppor for the Taliban hovers at or below the ten percent mark, Pakistanis do not support unmanned aerial strikes within their borders.
In fact, in a recent Gallup poll taken in October, 59 percent of respondents identified the United States as the greatest threat to the security of Pakistan, behind long time enemy India, at 18 percent, and the Taliban, at 11 percent. Only nine percent of respondents supported the United States military drone attacks, and a whopping 67 percent opposed ongoing United States military intervention in the country.
During a recent tour of Pakistan, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was confronted by many angry Pakistanis, some bluntly questioned the tactics employed by the United States and expressed outrage over the number of dead.
Voices of opposition from within
Many military officials privately oppose the use of unmanned aerial drones in the Pakistan theatre, but do not step forward to voice their opinions for fear of reprisal. Opposition to the continued use of drone attacks has also grown among former members of the military, including strident criticism from former adviser to General Stanley McChrystal, Andrew Exum.
The path ahead
The use of drones to prosecute the undeclared war in Pakistan is not without appeal: low cost, low visibility, and low threat of casualty to friendly forces. Obama may be tempted to favor the use of mechanized warfare to avoid scrutiny at home. However, it is clear that the continued use of these weapons will continue to have negative effects upon the innocent population of Pakistan that cannot be justified by any analysis, even the frigid amorality of realpolitik.
Please feel free to comment and discuss below.
If you liked this article, you may also enjoy:
United Nations election officials killed
Fraud likely in second round of Afghan presidential election
