On May 23, 2013, US President Barack Obama described US drone strikes as a “legal, effective and necessary” tool in an effort to combat terrorism while asserting that he is haunted by the fact that the strikes can unintentionally kill civilians and that they were definitely not a “cure-all.”
It seems, however, that the US will soon have to come up with a better defence if they want to continue to use drone warfare.
Human rights groups Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW) have begun to question the legality of these strikes, and recently issued a joint report classifying many of them as war crimes. Letta Taylor, senior counterterrorism researcher at HRW, explained in an interview with Al Jazeera, “As evidence emerges of civilian casualties in these strikes, it’s time for the US to stop covering its ears and start taking action to ensure the programme is legal.” These groups have demanded that the US conduct an open investigation on the civilian death toll of the drone strikes. They ask that there be accountability as well as a full legal rationale for the targeted killings.
Amnesty International, through the examination of drone strikes in Pakistan that took place in the last year, found that nine of the strikes could be classified as crimes of war. HRW also noted that “two of the attacks killed civilians indiscriminately in clear violation of the laws of war; the others may have targeted people who were not legitimate military objectives or caused disproportionate civilian deaths.” The joint report stated that such strikes set “a dangerous precedent that other states may seek to exploit to avoid responsibility for their own unlawful killings.” That is, if a key state like the US is able to conduct such a violation of human rights with impunity, it sets an example for other states to do the same.
Cailtin Hayden, spokesperson for the US National Security Council, was quick to defend the use of drone warfare. Hayden reiterated the rationale for drone strikes that President Obama outlined in his speech on May 23. In an email to the Washington Post, she wrote, “As the president emphasised, the use of lethal force, including from remotely piloted aircraft, commands the highest level of attention and care.” Hayden also noted that, “…before we take any counterterrorism strike, there must be near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured – the highest standard we can set.” She conceded, however, that the US is aware of the reports released by these rights groups and that they will be carefully reviewed.
Secret memos that purportedly reveal Pakistani endorsement of US drone strikes have surfaced recently, indicating there will be more developments to this story in the coming weeks. But in any case, the world will be waiting to see how the US will respond to the accusations: will they admit guilt or continue to defend the use of drone warfare?
