QUESTION
The Drone Arms Race in the 21st Century(29 april)
The drone arms race is rapidly proliferating and drone technology is developing at an alarmingly fast pace with a commanding US $94 billion market. The US, being the pioneer in this drone arms race, has a massive drone fleet in at least 60 drone bases operated by either the US military or the CIA around the world and most of these facilities are unnoted, uncounted, and anonymous. Chinese contractors have recently unveiled 25 types of drone aircrafts. As recently as in December 2011, Iran captured a US drone in Iranian airspace, not by shooting it out the sky but with its cyber warfare team. Turkey has also revealed its plan of having predatory drones in operation by June 2012. Georgia is currently testing autonomous drones requiring no human control at all. There may well be other countries deeply engaged in developing drone capabilities in confidence. There are already birdlike drones, underwater drones, drones within drones, facial recognition drones, and completely autonomous drones.
In its war on terror since the September Eleven, the US has consistently been using its drone fleet for both surveillance and combat missions particularly in Afghanistan and Pakistan for targeted killings by firing missiles, and spying on insurgents through intelligence gathering and capturing video footages of cities and hideouts. In many instances, the US authority is not sure exactly who its drone operations are killing. The mass media and the UN reports are littered with unarmed and innocent civilian killings and property destructions. But the US justifies its drone operations as an act of self-defence against terrorism. Pakistan on the other hand publicly and vehemently denounces drone strikes in its territory. It maintains that the US drone attacks in Pakistan have killed and injured innumerable civilians and damaged their properties and that these drone attacks are acts of aggression in violation of its sovereignty. The steady buzzing of predatory drones overhead has become a grim and terrifying fact of life today for many civilians living around the Pak-Afghan borders. Against this background, a group of human rights based voluntary non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has launched a worldwide campaign for a halt to the drone bombing and legal redress for innocent civilian victims.
Obviously the drone arms race has legal implications for the principle of the prohibition of use of force in international relations under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held as one of the jus cogens norms of international law and permissible uses of force as an act of self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter. The drone arms race also impacts on the UN agenda of disarmament as a precondition of achieving and sustaining international peace and security.
The NGO group referred to is seeking from you an international law based opinion on the legality or illegality of US drone attacks in Pakistan. Do these attacks violate the sovereignty of Pakistan? Is there any available international legal avenue to halt these drone killings and provide redress to victims? Provide a legal opinion on these issues.
A legally reasoned and subsumable opinion is solicited.
SOLUTION
DRONE ARMS RACE
Terrorism is main reason for invention of the Drone Arms Race. The attack on US on 11, September has resulted in developing the plan of drone arms force. These arm forces are sophisticated unmanned aerial vehicles also known as remotely piloted aircrafts (RPA), were basically used for surveillance purpose during the regime of Clinton, but with development of technology and dismay over the Americans from Afghanistan and China have changed the usage of these drones in to deploying missiles into the marked terrorism countries like Pakistan, Yemen etc.
As we know terrorism is the basis for this armed force now we need to understand what terrorism is. Terrorism has never been specifically defined internationally; there have been many unsuccessful attempts in giving a generic definition for it. In general sense terrorism is known to be the unlawful procedure of inflicting terror. It is used to inculcate fear with the help of violence. The main elements of terrorism are violence, fear and intimidation, which induce fear in victims. This terrorism has drastically affected many regions in the world and is still being in full force.
One of the examples of drastic effects of terrorism is the 9/11 attack on America[1]. Terrorism is a criminal act that influences the immediate victim. It is a kind of an act of violence to draw attention of public, government and others. This is one of the attentions seeking method but the methodology used is creating fear in all the citizens. Terrorism is also termed to be known as politically-motivated violence against the non-combatant targets[2]. An anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action for any reasons such as criminal or political or religious, where the targets directed are not the direct targets but those who impact the decision and power of the direct targets[3]. In terrorism the targets are innocent people, the terrorism group or agents use terrorist attacks as message generator to the government or the authority to recognize their needs and wants. If the government does not satisfy their needs then they induce more terror by unlawful methods. It is defined as violence based communication process[4]. The effect of terrorism does not lie in the act, but in the reactions of the public and government.
One of the solutions for terrorism found by Americans is the Drone Arms race, where the military based operates the flights from remote based in the local areas and these arms which were once use for surveillance now can even dismantle missiles in the targeted areas. These arms races have really bought a greater change in the role of reducing terrorism in the world. Addressing the phenomenon of terrorism is a complex and challenging task, while condemning these terrorism activities internationally has been unanimous and the efforts made to regulate the terrorism phenomenon have be marred with the different approaches and competing concerns. Many key issues relating the solution of terrorism remain unanswered due to growth of new technologies and new ways of terrorist attacks.
Terrorism as understood earlier is one of the threats against the peace of the world. The main aim of International Community, i.e. state is protecting its citizens. They not only have right to protect but it is their duty to protect. In the course of protecting its citizens from terrorism and its attacks the government should also note that it is not frustrating any of the norms of human rights nor it is violating the humanitarian standards. In order to protect its citizens the state cannot insult the sovereignty of different countries.
Many countries around the world have entered into contract of anti-terrorism – fight against terrorism, with the United Nations many specialized agencies[5] it has been trying to develop peace in the world. In its war against terrorism, US has been consistently using Drone flights not just for surveillance purpose but also for the purpose of combat against the terrorist activated areas and countries. With the help of these flights the government is capable of viewing all the militant activity areas and even terrorist armed forces. With 230 drone flights US is caring out the drone attacks frequently. Advanced technology, and heightened dismay against America has resulted in development of drones for deploying missiles. It is also using this technology for spying on insurgents through intelligence and capturing videos of their military base their hideouts and their operations. The pilots engage in combats by remote, from the other side of the world in way the professional loss is sustained, but not the loss of people on ground. Even though this arms race has lot of advantage with its advanced technology it is causing a great loss to the civilians who are innocent in the act of terrorism. In its many drone operations US has caused a greater loss to the lives of the innocent people who are not the actual targets but get caught by being in and around the premises of the drone targeted areas. US authority is not exactly sure who its Drone attacks are killing, but they are justifying their acts as a method of self-defense against the act of terrorism. This method as mentioned is acting as a defense against terrorism but what about the killings of the poor innocent people in these operations. Pakistan who is affected by these drone attacks drastically has publically denounced the drone attacks in its territory and it felt it to be an act against it sovereignty. It announced that the US drone attacks have killed and injured innumerable civilians and their property and it has threatened the lives of the civilians in to leading a terror life with the armed forces above their head in the sky.
It is important to fight against terrorism but in a way that there is no harm to innocent people and not in a way the terrorist do to induce fear in all the people around. It is legal to protect the world against terrorist attacks but would be unlawful if the attacks are merely made out of vengeance. This also impacts the disarmament movement which falls as an agenda in UN charter.
If the argument is against use of Drone in combat, controversially humanists Andrew Stobo Sniderman and Mark Hanis are of the view that Drones can be used for protecting the citizens from their human rights abused. They are of the view that surveillance drones have to be used for preventing massacres and blood shed, for protecting human lives. The reason for this controversial view is to boost the humanitarian norms taken by the different organizations. They viewed that use of surveillance drone may also help in reducing the terrorist attack if the gathered information on surveillance has been provided to the intelligence department, which can warn the targeted countries. This view has been criticized and felt worrisome to the human rights.
In the given essay US drones have disturbed the sovereignty of Pakistan by steadily buzzing its air traffic with predator drones. As per the constitution every country has sovereignty over the place, area and the air space above it. Here the act of US can be termed unconstitutional as it using its drones for surveillance and predating purpose affecting the freedom of the country and its citizens. It is legal to use drones for waging a war against terrorism but what about the lives of the innocent people that get ruined in this combat.
Best example for the human causality caused by US drones is the death of Tariq Aziz who helped the American Lawyer Clive Stafford Smith in Islamabad. Smith worked as a member of International human rights organization. He visited Islamabad, in a view to attain certain proof against the clandestine drone war conducted by US against Pakistan i.e. collecting physical evidence in linking the US drone strikes with civilian casualties in Islamabad. Tariq Aziz volunteered to help him, but three days after he met smith he died in a drone strike[6].
Even after being acknowledged with this matter, Barack Obama confided that the US drone were target based and focused on people who are named in the list of active terrorist, and also concluded that there were less civil causalities. But there is no magic number in reducing the number of casualties or in depriving the desolation of people who sustain the death of their loved ones. The civilian number killed is difficult to extract as even the journalist are banned from getting deeper in to the situation.
The study of the New American Foundation stated that there were 114 drone attacks from 2004 to 2010 on Pakistan and from 830 to 1020 were killed of which 550 to 850 were civilians. Thus, from the given statistics it can be noted that in the view to wage war against terrorism US had even targeted innocent people who constitute half of their killings6.
The NGO group that has launched ban against drone bombing can argue based on the above observations and can be advised to fight against the unlawful drone attacks of the US government, because there is little or no framework present for use of drone in war or for surveillance, also what is the evidence that the surveillance drones cannot be utilized for combat purpose. It can base its fight with the support of the Article 2(4) and Article 51[7] of the UN charter which prohibits the use of force in armed relations. It can even fight for the main fundamental right of the individual, i.e. Right to Life. We all know that as per the constitution Right to Life is that right which cannot be abused by other person. In short every person has the right to live and US in this context has no right to kill innocent people while attacking the targeted terrorists.
Even though internationally UN organization is aiming at abolishing terrorism, it still follows the disarmament movement for peace and security of the citizens all over the world. The fact is that forces in many countries have already started using drone combat with US in lead to be pursued by Australia. It can be noted that we have already prepared over selves for a global combat with the advanced technology and it would not be surprising to have the organizations fighting against it silenced.
The NGO has to base its moment on the fact of Right to Life and protection of humanity against these armed forces. The main aim of UNO is to have a world of peace and security but with armed race as these citizens have to make themselves habituated as they have for the nuclear weapon race. It can be understood that US is fighting against terrorism for protecting the human race from the clutches of the terrorist attacks but this does not mean that it has to take away lives of people to attain a terror free world. The legal advice for the NGO as stated above would be to continue with its moment of abolishing the drone race based on Right to life and also demonstrate and knowledge people about the severity of this armed race. Once the citizen start questioning then the government has to come down to answer them and has to go as per the promises it made to its citizens. It is true to drain away terrorism but the way used by US is not correct as it is taking away lives of many innocent people. There are indeed ways in which state can deal with the implication of new technologies and new strategies of weapons as drone is not just a police operation but it is a military operation and it has to be dealt properly.
As stated in the examples the best case study would be the attack on Pakistan in 2004 to 2010. It is known fact that in order to capture the Al-Qiada leader Bin Laden, America had the Drone combat on Pakistan from 2004 to 2010, in this combat there was loss of not only the targeted person but also the untargeted innocent people. The numbers of civilian causalities have not been limited. US were killing 50 unintended people for every 1 intended people[8].
Thus, it can be concluded that NGO group can succeed in its campaign against the drone attack with all the above given observations. It can knowledge people internationally the importance of life and the cons of weapons. It can make the citizens fight against the death of innocent but not against the death of terrorist as they do not understand the value of the innocent lives they kill for attaining their target of inducing terror and giving message to the government.
REFERENCE:
Ø What is Terrorism? Definition of Terrorism2, 3, 4 Terrorism Research; http://www.terrorism-research.com/
Ø Saul, B, ‘Attempts to Define ‘Terrorism’ in International Law’(2005) 52 (LII) Neth I L Rev 57-83.
Ø Sarkin J. Jeremy, Human Rights and International Discourse, Vol. 1, 2007, Hofstra Univ. Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-24, Hofstra University – School of Law; http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1304613&rec=1&srcabs=1277583
Ø Terrorism and International Law: Challenges and Responses, Proceedings of International Seminars organised by the International Institute of Humanitarian Law held on 30 May –1 June and 24 –26 September 2002.
Ø Lynch, A, Macdonald, E, and Williams, G (eds), Law and Liberty in the War on Terror, The Federation Press, Sydney, 2007
Ø Andreas Lorenz, Juliane von Mittelstaedt and Gregor Peter Schmitz ‘Messengers of death’, Are Drones creating a new global arms race; http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,792590,00.html
Ø Fitzpatrick, J, ‘Speaking Law to Power: The War against Terrorism and Human Rights’ (2003) 14 European JIL 241.
Ø Measham Fatima, Australia Follows US Drone lead, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2012
Ø The Volokh Conspiracy “what kind of Drones Arms Race is coming” Anderson Kenneth, 2011
Ø Collective Security – A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility, Report of the Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, UN Secretariat, 2004
Ø Bianchi, A and Keller A (eds), Counterterrorism, Hart Pub, June 2008
Ø Goldstone, R J and Simpson, J, ‘Evaluating the Role of the International Criminal Court as a Legal Response to Terrorism’, (2003) 16 Harvard H R J 13
Ø Rostow, N, ‘Before and After: The Changed UN Response to Terrorism Since September 11th’, (2001-2) 35 Cornell Int’l L J 475
Ø David Kilcullen & Andrew McDonald Exum, Death From Above, Outrage Down Below, N.Y. TIMES
Ø Peter Bergman & Katherine Tiedemann, The Drone War, NEW REPUBLIC, June 3, 2009
Ø The Charter of United Nations, signed on 26 June, 1945, in force 24 October, 1945
Ø Schechter Danny, The ‘Drone War’ Expands, 2012; http://consortiumnews.com/2012/04/28/the-drone-war-expands/
[1] Attack on World Trade Center and Pentagon, New York on 9th September, 2012
[2] US Department of State
[3] UN, 1992
[4] British Government, 1994, explains its view about terrorism
[5] Namely the International Civil Aviation Organization and the International Maritime Organization but also the ‘related organization’ of the International Atomic Energy Agency
[6] Fatima Measham, Vol.22 No. 2,2012, Article
[7] Universal Declarations of Human Rights, General Assembly. Article 2(4), All members shall refrain in their international relationship from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state or any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of United Nations; Article 51, Inherent right if individual or collective self-defense if an armed force attacks the members of United Nation’s members.
[8] David Killculen, New York Times, 2009
KD68
But you can order it from our service and receive complete high-quality custom paper. Our service offers Politics essay sample that was written by professional writer. If you like one, you have an opportunity to buy a similar paper. Any of the academic papers will be written from scratch, according to all customers’ specifications, expectations and highest standards.”
DRONE ARMS RACE
