Leonard Kahn
Assistant professor of philosophy
On Oct. 7, 2001, the US attacked the government of Afghanistan and, in the process, began the longest war in our history. But this date is likely to be remembered by future historians for something that, at the time, went almost unnoticed. For it was on this date that the U.S. government first used a remotely piloted aerial vehicle – a.k.a. a drone – as a weapon of war.
Since the beginning of the conflict in Afghanistan, the U.S. government has initiated hundreds of drone attacks in Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa. During the last eight years, U.S. drone strikes have killed between 2,372 and 2,581 of what the Office of the Director of National Intelligence refers to as “combatants.” Furthermore, some credible sources estimate that more than 800 non-combatants have been killed by these same drone attacks. In total, U.S. drone strikes have ended roughly as many lives as the 9/11 attacks did.
The main reason that the U.S. government has used drones with increasing frequency is that the perceived benefits greatly outweigh the apparent costs. While drones are less expensive than conventional weapons, this is not just a matter of dollars and cents. Since the late 1960s, the U.S. public has shown limited patience for military operations that risk the lives of American combatants. However, drone pilots are thousands of miles from their theaters of operation, and they experience no risk of harm in battle. Finally, drones are more effective than alternative means of projecting power without risking personnel since drones are far more accurate and more lethal than, for example, long-range cruise missiles.
The technology that makes drones both possible and cost-effective is here to stay. The question for us, then, is this: what norms for the use of drones should we demand of our government? Let me make three points that, I hope, will help to focus discussion of this important question.
To begin with, the U.S. is, or at least aspires to be, a democracy. Hence, strategic choices about the use of military assets should be under the control of the people and their representatives. And such control is possible only to the extent that we are not in the dark about their use. Yet, the use of drones has little effective congressional oversight and is obscure to citizens outside the military. Both of these things must change if we are to live up to our own democratic ideals.
Moreover, the U.S. is part of the international community, a community bound both by the rule of law and by the norms of just war. But the development of drone technology has raced ahead of the development of international law and just war theory. As a result, our government has been able to act without some of the constraints that law and morality rightly impose on the use of deadly force. We cannot allow this situation to continue. To take but one example, our government currently undertakes drone operations in countries (such as Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan) that we are not at war with. Doing so is inconsistent with the principles of international law, just war and the community of nations.
Finally, we must rethink our government’s professed need to use drones. As we’ve seen, the first drone strike, which took place only a few weeks after 9/11, and the use of drones have played an increasingly central role in what has come to be called “the global war on terror.” This fact should not surprise us. The vast majority of combat operations associated with the global war on terror have taken place far from U.S. soil under conditions where the cost-effectiveness of drones is most in evidence. By reconsidering the actions that have led us into the global war on terror – including the support of tyrannical regimes abroad – we might find that we need drones less than we had thought.
“War,” Military Theorist Carl von Clausewitz famously remarked, “is the continuation of politics by other means.” So, while we must not fail to ask whether our political goals are just, we should also ask whether – and under what conditions – drone warfare is the right means to try to attain them.
