For Americans, the drones have come home

March 10, 2013 0 Comments

John Brennans confirmation process as President Barack Obamas nominee for Central Intelligence Agency director has shed a rare light on the American drone campaign. The legality of drone warfare and its long term implications have come to a head as Americans are forced to consider the possibility of armed drones flying over the homeland.

Like President Obamas other counterterrorism policies, such as rendition and imprisonment of foreign terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, the use of armed drones to kill suspected terrorists abroad does not originate with his administration. Rather it is an outgrowth of his predecessors War on Terrorism, an ambiguous conflict that has led to a dramatic expansion of executive power in the United States, with the last two presidents wielding more power than previously thought possible without a formal declaration of war from Congress. In his first term as president, the number of drone strikes Obama authorized far surpassed the number his predecessor, George W. Bush, authorized in his two terms combined.

Public scrutiny of the drone campaign had been minimal until recently. While major news outlets carried reports of drone strikes overseas, the debate had largely been relegated to activist groups and policy journals. Living Under Drones, a joint study conducted by NYU and Stanford University, detailed numerous cases of civilian casualties that resulted from U.S. drone missions in Pakistan. The report received little media coverage aside from brief comments made by Fareed Zakaria on CNN. According to a report on global opinions released by Pew Research last year, 17 of the 21 nations surveyed held majorities that disapproved of drone attacks. Americans were outliers, with 62% approving, including 74% of Republicans, 60% of independents and 58% of Democrats, according to the report. In June of last year, several American newspaper reports gave unprecedented glimpses into the administrations decision making process, detailing how and why targets were chosen for drone strikes. The term kill list was popularized, referring to a list of terror suspects abroad who were being targeted for aerial assassination. Jo Becker and Scott Shane of the New York Times provided one such glimpse. In their article, Obama was said to have paused while studying photographs of Al Qaeda members. How old are these people, he asked, questioning the ages of the some of the suspects, If they are staring to use children we are moving into a whole different phase. It was revealed that the president had assumed strict oversight in the drone campaign, insisting that he alone would give the final order for a strike. His view is that hes responsible for the position of the United Sates in the world, Thomas E. Donilon, Obamas national security adviser, told the New York Times, Hes determined to keep the tether short. A few eyebrows were raised when Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen, was killed by a drone strike in Yemen in September of 2011. Two weeks later Awlakis 16 year old son was also killed in a drone strike, although he was not intentionally targeted in the attack. According to Becker and Shane, who quoted anonymous sources, Obama told colleagues that the decision to target Awlaki was an easy one. Despite these unprecedented accounts of White House deliberations, much of the policy governing drone warfare is still shrouded in secrecy. Memos written by the Department of Justice, meant to advise the president on the legality of his drone campaign, have largely been kept from outside hands. What is known is that John Brennan has played a key role in advising the president on potential targets. During his tenure in the White House as counterterrorism adviser he was the chief architect and curator of the kill list and had the presidents ear when final decisions were made.

Hes probably had more power and influence than anyone in a comparable position in the last 20 years, Daniel Benjamin told the New York Times in a February 2013 article. The presidents nomination of Brennan for CIA director required Senate approval and therefore put the 25 year CIA veteran and Obama strongman in the media spotlight. During Brennans initial hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, the administration responded to incessant questioning of the drone campaign by releasing 2 of the 11 Justice Department memos. The debate over American drone policy turned into front page material when Senator Rand Paul, a Republican representing Kentucky, asked Attorney General Eric Holder if the president would ever authorize the use of armed drones to kill a U.S. citizen within the United States. Holder responded with a letter, stating that such a situation was hypothetical and highly unlikely and that the administration had no plans to take such measures. However, Holder did not rule out the possibility of such an attack, writing, It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the United Statesif necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances of a catastrophic attack Holder went on to invoke the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor and the 2001 terrorist attacks as examples of extraordinary circumstances. Senator Paul was outraged, telling the press, When I asked the president, can you kill an American on American soil, it should have been a resounding, unequivocal, no. Paul then proceeded to voice opposition to Brennans confirmation, and in an rare move, began to filibuster the confirmation, speaking for nearly 13 hours. During his historic filibuster, a stalling procedure during which the Senator filibustering can speak continuously or allow others to speak but cannot leave the Senate floor, Paul gave a scathing critique of president Obamas civil liberties record, at one point insisting that the Barack Obama of 2007 would be right down here with me arguing against this drone strike program if he were in the Senate. While the Senator from Kentucky was ultimately unsuccessful in his effort to block Brennans nomination, his efforts did help secure the release of two additional legal memos, the four of which outline the Obama administrations justification for targeting American citizens abroad. While the American public may have little reason to fear armed drones occupying the skies over Los Angeles, the Obama administrations drone campaign still continues to function in executive secrecy. Although the memos regarding targeting American citizens abroad were delivered to the Senate Intelligence Committee, members of the committee were not allowed to keep the memos or make copies. They brought them in for review, and they took them away, Senator Diane

Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters. Drone technology is not limited to military use and there is a burgeoning industry for civilian drones in the United States, both for law enforcement and agricultural purposes. Last month, Charlottesville, Virginia became the first city in the U.S. to pass legislation restricting the use of drones. In the current issue of the New Republic, Alec MacGillis documents his experience with the drone lobby, officially known as the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, which spends approximately $250,000 annually on Capitol Hill lobbying efforts, according to his report. The Attorney General may have reassured Senator Paul that there will be no drone strikes in Cincinnati, but drones may soon become a mainstay in the skies over rural Iowa. Regardless, the tension between legislative oversight and innovative technology will only increase. Addressing the issue of foreign sales, Feinstein told MSNBC, In some respects its a perfect assassination weapon. It can see from 17,000 to 20,000 feet up in the air, it is very precise, it can knock out a room in a building if its armed, its a very dangerous weapon. Right now we have a problem, there are all these nations that want to buy these armed drones. Im strongly opposed to that. Photo: drsmith7383 via creatice commons.