International Law – Page 5

US drone strikes return to Pakistan with a vengeance as resistance grows

20/05/2011Chris Cole

After something of a lull, US drone strikes have returned with a vengeance to Pakistan over the past two weeks, the latest of which, killed six people this afternoon. In addition strikes have taken place on 10th, 12th, 13th and 16 May. According to the Pakistan Observer, 238 people have been killed and 40 injured in 39 drone strikes in Pakistan since 1st Jan 2011 (excluding today’s strike). The Oxford Research Group has today issued an interesting paper examining the various casualty figures reported for drone strikes in Pakistan.

This weekend, thousands of Pakistanis are expected to respond to Imran Khan’s call to protest the drone strikes by blocking NATO supply routes through Pakistan for forces in Afghanistan. A protest will also take place outside the US embassy in London tomorrow (21st May) and UK Pakistanis plan to protest drone attacks during President Obama’s speech to UK Parliament on May 25th.

Meanwhile US Attorney General, Eric Holder, told Channel 4 news this week that US drone strikes in Pakistan were totally consistent with International law:

“Anybody who is the target of any of our military action is always thought to be somebody who is thought to be a threat to the US, so there is a basis to any of the action we take, on the battlefield, in the variety of ways that we do it.”

His suggestion, that It is lawful to kill someone who is merely thought to be a threat would be laughable, if it were not so awful. However, as Tara McKelvey points out in an excellent article for the Colombia Journalism Review on the reporting of drone strikes, many journalists seem to meekly accept these bland assurances. Challenging her fellow journalists, McKelvey suggests that

“A more whole-hearted pushback is in order, with top newsrooms banding together, backed by their legal departments, to try to force a more substantive and open public policy debate on whom and how the US decides to kill with the push of a button.”

Well, we can only hope

Drone wars and international law: videos from US day conference

02/03/2011Chris Cole

Last week the New America Foundation and the American Society of International Law among others sponsored a day conference at the Arizona State University on the issue of drone warfare and the law. The event brought together international lawyers, journalists, military officers, social scientists, foreign policy experts and others to discuss current and future legal issues surrounding the use of drones and emerging military technologies.

The conference literature stated: “Many commentators have raised questions about the legality of the use of unmanned drones by the United States, especially where attacks occur outside of clearly defined zones of conflict. However, far less attention has been paid to the complex legal processes used by the U.S. military in determining the lawfulness of specific drone attacks based on the Law of Armed Conflict. To the degree that drones and remote targeting technologies gather accurate data and deliver focused attacks, they could enable the United States and others to more appropriately respect the internationally accepted principle of minimizing harm to civilians enshrined in the Geneva Conventions.

Nevertheless, the significant asymmetries of power of drones undermine rule-based conflict and may threaten the viability of more humane visions of war. Furthermore, as these technologies increase in use, lethality and independence, armed conflict may become an arena in which thinking machines operate with ever greater autonomy, raising important legal questions about decision making and accountability.”

Well, I would certainly disagree with a lot of that but discussion about drone wars and international law can only be a good thing. Thankfully the sessions were videotaped and are available here.

US drone strikes resume in Pakistan

21/02/2011Chris Cole

The Washington Post reported today (Feb 21^st) that out of 118 CIA drone strikes in Pakistan only 13 ‘High Value Targets’ had been killed, of which only two were on the US’ Most Wanted list. According to the New American Foundation it is estimated that a total of 607 people were killed in US drones strikes in Pakistan in 2010. Interestingly the Post report also states that each drone strike in Pakistan costs the CIA £1m!

The press report comes as two separate drone strikes in Pakistan reportedly killed eleven people . These are the first drone strikes in Pakistan in almost a month, a gap which many attribute to the US attempts to free Raymond Davis, an alleged CIA spy accused of killing two men in Lahore in mid-January. For more about the Davis case see this report from the Guardian.

The ‘DC Exile’ blog has some interesting reflections on the legality of US drone strikes following last week’s Newsweek interview with the former CIA counsel , John Rizzo, who authorised drone strikes in Pakistan. They suggest that the revelation that once identified, a targeted individual may be subject to the use of force at any time thereafter calls into question one of the US stated legal justification for drone strikes:

“such continuous targetability calls into question the ability of the United States to rely on self-defense as one of its two legal justifications for its targeted killing program. Strikes against these continuously targetable individuals would then only be lawful within the context of an armed conflict. Any targeted killing outside of an armed conflict or valid self-defense would be an illegal, extrajudicial execution.”

It’s well worth reading the whole post.

Meanwhile Radio One’s ‘Newsbeat’ programme secured an interview with 15 year old Sadaullah Wazir who lost both his legs and an eye in US drone strike in North Waziristan (as well as members of his family). He is currently attempting to sue the CIA. You can see short video of the interview here.

In Afghanistan NATO have launched an investigation after the Governor of Konar province said 65 people including 22 women and more than 30 children were killed in a NATO operation. Most reports suggest the attacks were carried out by NATO helicopters but the Washington Post says a Predator drone was also involved.

PS….. Drone Wars UK – Mini Tour

I’m doing a few speaking gigs over the next few weeks on drones – do come along if you are in the area.

Sun 27^th Feb, 7pm, Porthmadog FoR – Y Ganolfan, Porthmadog : Details here

Mon 28^th Feb, 7.30pm Caermarfon FoR – vestry of Salem chapel, Caernarfon: Details here

Tues 1^st Mar: 7.30pm Oxford Stop the War – Town Hall, Oxford: Details here

Mon 14^th Mar: 8pm – Friends Meeting House, Queens Road Leicester CND AGM

Thur 14^th Apr: 7.30pm – Public Meeting, Friends Meeting House, Bristol

Sat 14^th May, 2pm – FoR Scotland Annual Conference

Newsweek: Inside the Killing Machine

14/02/2011Chris Cole

by Tara McKelvey

Don’t normally repost other people’s articles here but this is an illuminating piece from Newsweek on how, as it says in the article “the formal process of determining who should be hunted down and “blown to bits” by a drone is undertaken.

It was an ordinary-looking room located in an office building in northern Virginia. The place was filled with computer monitors, keyboards, and maps. Someone sat at a desk with his hand on a joystick. John A. Rizzo, who was serving as the CIA’s acting general counsel, hovered nearby, along with other people from the agency. Together they watched images on a screen that showed a man and his family traveling down a road thousands of miles away. The vehicle slowed down, and the man climbed out.

A moment later, an explosion filled the screen, and the man was dead. “It was very businesslike,” says Rizzo. An aerial drone had killed the man, a high-level terrorism suspect, after he had gotten out of the vehicle, while members of his family were spared. “The agency was very punctilious about this,” Rizzo says. “They tried to minimize collateral damage, especially women and children.”

The broad outlines of the CIA’s operations to kill suspected terrorists have been known to the public for some time—including how the United States kills Qaeda and Taliban militants by drone aircraft in Pakistan. But the formal process of determining who should be hunted down and “blown to bits,” as Rizzo puts it, has not been previously reported. A look at the bureaucracy behind the operations reveals that it is multilayered and methodical, run by a corps of civil servants who carry out their duties in a professional manner. Still, the fact that Rizzo was involved in “murder,” as he sometimes puts it, and that operations are planned in advance in a legalistic fashion, raises questions. [[Article continues on Newsweek site here]]

Drones: See No Border, Hear No Victims, Speak No Peace

20/11/2010Chris Cole

“You expect us to open the skies for anything that you can fly… in which country can you do that?” Unnamed Pakistani Intelligence Official

The Washington Post reports today (Nov. 20th) that further pressure is being put on the Pakistani government to widen the area that US drones are allowed to strike within Pakistan.

Unsurprisingly, after more than 100 drone strikes this year alone in the area in which they are operating, the Pakistani government has refused the request. This stance has, to put it mildly, annoyed the powers that be with one senior anonymous NATO military official quoted as saying “If they understand our side, they know the patience is running out.”

Also barely reported this week (and anytime it happens) was Israel’s incursion by unmanned drone into Lebanon. The flight, which pass within almost 50 miles of the capital Beirut, was in direct violation of UN resolutions (as Israel regularly is).

While neither the US nor Israel are famed for their respect of international law, there does seem to be something about unmanned drones that appears to mean a decrease in respect for international borders and sovereignty. Perhaps it’s the fact that the drone is unmanned and so ‘no body’ is actually crossing a border makes a difference to the military mind.

With more than forty countries developing unmanned drones these precedents of armed drones crossing international borders seemingly at will makes for a worrying future and suggests that a ban on armed drones is more important than ever.

US Drone Strikes Intensify In Pakistan

15/09/2010Chris Cole

Over the past ten days or so there have been over a dozen reported drone strikes in Pakistan near the Afghan border. Associated Press reports today (15th Sept) that drone strikes “have killed more than 60 people in 13 strikes since Sept. 2 in the Pakistani region of North Waziristan.” AP based their figures on Pakistani intelligence officials’ reports, other sources put the death toll at 75. Many of the drone strikes have taken place around Datta Khel, a town of about 40,000 people that sits on a strategically vital road to the Afghan border. According to The Guardian, this is the most intense and sustained period of US drone strikes in Pakistan since the US began attacks in Pakistan in 2004, while the Christian Science Monitor says that US drone strikes in Pakistan have now reached 70 this year – a new record.

Many of the news reports on the strikes quote anonymous US intelligence sources saying that the strikes are aimed at the Haqqani Network, a family /tribal network with alleged links to Al Qaeda. None of the reports that I have seen so far remind readers that the US has not declared war on Pakistan and so such strikes are unlawful. In addition such a period of intense bombardment is highly likely to incur civilian casualties and will no doubt lead to further alienation of the Pakistan population.