David Eden

March 10, 2015

English 1000

Journal 5

Shaw, Ian G. R. "Predator Empire: The Geopolitics Of US Drone Warfare." Geopolitics 18.3 (2013): 536-559. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Mar. 2015.

In this article, Shaw talks about how drones have already become a very large part of our military dealings on foreign soil and how their use instead of traditional group troops is explained to the public.  Every couple of years, the white house publishes a National Security Strategy (NSS), which outlines and groups its ideas for the next couple of years, as well as list its allies across the globe.  Shortly after its release comes the National Strategy for Counterterrorism (NSC), which further outlines the United States plans to fight terrorism across the globe.  In 2010, the NSC stated that its operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan has successfully disrupted the core of the terrorist groups operating in the area, and has weakened them nationally.  But nowhere in either document does it say anything about drones, which has sparked out rage because the use of drones is well known to the public, and their targeted killing can be linked to civilian deaths.  Shaw goes on to state how organizations at Stanford and NYU found four repeating causes of drone casualties and negative reputations for these strikes.  The first was a so called double tap, where drone operators often fired an unnecessary second missile that kills first responders and other civilians that were trying to help. The second reason was the constant hovering of drones, and that they always seem to be present, casting a negative opinion on the people who seem to always have drones around them.  Third, the strikes push nonviolent people to turn violent, and join terrorist groups, and fourth, the CIA program does not follow international laws.  However, the use of drones in these hostile regions still has a very high approval rating despite the questions it brings with.  Shaw also goes on to talk about how under president Bush, the CIA no longer has to identify targets by name before using lethal force from a drone, as they has previously been restricted by and required to have the attack passed by a legal team.  This led to a rapid expanse in drone use, including a rapid increase in assassinations. This allows the CIA under Obama to go crazy with drone strikes, and in Pakistan, their heavy use has lead to deaths that were not attributed to 9/11 attacks, which means that the CIA could just be using them to carry out their own missions. 

After reading this article, the CIA operations involving drones is quite extensive, and their use is found around the globe.  While trying to monitor the whole globe, the CIA also is using these drones to execute people that don’t always have a direct affiliation to the terrorists we were looking for when we entered the area.  They have started to use this term of affiliation to try to justify their killings of people, but with tactics such as the double tap, their pilots and generals may be a little too trigger happy.  There have been increasing numbers of estimations of civilian casualties, but no one knows for sure, and even though using a drone to kill a target may save the lives of a US soldier, the explosion and ensuing damage from the blast may cause more damage to those around.  After president Bush eased the requirements to launch a drone strike, there has been an exponential jump in their use over seas.  As technology continues to advance, our weapons will as well, and this causes a huge problem for national sovereignty.  Our presence is felt globally, and it doesn’t always come with a thank you, and it is often met with negative views on the US.

If I was to synthesize this paper, I would say that Shaw would agree with most of the other authors in that our operations over seas with drones, especially the dealing with the CIA, is quite illegal according to international law.   Shaw would argue that even though the technological advances seem like they would help reduce the deaths of war, they seem to affect the lives of civilians instead.

After reviewing all of my sources, I have found that our operations with drones can very easily be challenged in the court of law, but I would still have to do more research to determine if their use is better than the use of traditional ground troops.