Strategies for Minimizing Civilian Deaths in Drone Attacks, Without Compromising National Safety
In the realm of counterterrorism efforts, the use of armed unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones, has been a principal tool since 2002. This technology has been particularly significant in the strategies of both the Obama and Biden administrations.
The Obama administration expanded the use of drones for targeted killing, and in 2013, the exact implementation date of the "near certain" target standards for US drone strikes in Pakistan was established. This shift marked a significant evolution in the administration's approach, leading to a lower number of civilian casualties.
According to research by Paul Lushenko, Shyam Raman, and Sarah Kreps, authors of the recently published volume "Drones and Global Order: Implications of Remote Warfare for International Society," the adoption of more restrictive targeting protocols resulted in a reduction of civilian deaths in Pakistan. Their study shows that the shift from twelve civilian deaths per month to one or less was a direct result of the near certainty standard.
The near certainty standard in drone strikes can reduce battlefield risks to both soldiers and civilians while effectively targeting terrorists, without compromising US national security. This conditioning may, however, impose difficult trade-offs between military necessity and noncombatant immunity, forcing military officials to recalibrate the balance between protecting soldiers and civilians when striking targets.
Despite these efforts, US drone strikes have resulted in the deaths of up to 2,200 civilians since 2002. To address this issue, condolence payments have been made to victims' families, with the US military making seventy-one such payments in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2019, the highest payment being thirty-five thousand US dollars.
However, these payments may not fully compensate for the economic implications of civilian casualties during US strikes and may further contribute to the grievances that fuel political violence.
The Biden administration is expected to maintain the status quo for drone strikes abroad. His counterterrorism strategy is also based on remote warfare technologies, particularly drones. The near certainty standard, which was instrumental in reducing civilian casualties under the Obama administration, is likely to continue playing a crucial role in US counterterrorism efforts.
It's important to note that the views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.
The Obama administration's adoption of the near certainty standard did not expose the US homeland to terrorist attacks emerging from Pakistan. This suggests that the implementation of such standards can be an effective means of minimising civilian casualties without compromising US security.
In conclusion, the near certainty standard in drone strikes has proven to be a valuable tool in reducing civilian casualties and maintaining national security. However, it's crucial to continue addressing the potential economic and political implications of these strikes to ensure a balanced approach to counterterrorism efforts.
Read also:
- Lu Shiow-yen's Challenging Position as Chair of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Under Scrutiny in Donovan's Analysis
- Who is Palestine Action, the organization tied to numerous arrests within the UK?
- "Trump Criticizes EU's $3.5 billion fine on Google as Unjust, Threatens Additional Tariffs"
- Restructuring community adaptability amidst multiple concurrent crises
