Lincoln Douglas Topic Lecture

1. Lincoln Douglas Topic Lecture March/April 2012

2. Resolved: Targeted killing is a morally permissible foreign policy tool.

3. Definitions • Targeted Killing: Deliberate specific targeted killing by a government or its agents of a terrorist or combatants who is not in the government’s custody. There is no other option, the intent to kill is from the start. • Takes place during an armed conflict as part of a military effort. • Extra-judicial killing is with the intent to put them on trial but kill them anyway. This is knowingly illegal. There are other alternatives but we’re going to kill them anyway. • Assassination is considered illegal under national and international law. Usually against a political opponent, not at a time of war. Typically within own country.

4. Gary Solis (Georgetown Law) defines the parameters of Targeted Killing as such: • An armed conflict is somehow in progress. • Target must be a specific individual. • Target must be involved in that conflict. • A senior official must authorize the killing. • Clear and present danger exists. • No reasonable alternative exists. Option of last resort. • ** Unmanned drones usually responsible for carrying out targeted killings, Osama Bin Laden’s death was unique because it became crucial that there be human confirmation.

5. General Analysis: • Morally permissible? What makes something moral? • Moral permissibility concedes that there is going to be some questionable means (messy) • Morally prohibited? • A duty?

6. Agents of Action/Evaluation • Agents of Action: Governments or government agents. • Agents of Evaluation: who determines if this is permissible? One country? The international community?

7. Negation • Foreign policy implies a self-interested strategy chosen by states to safeguard their national interest. • “Empire” the idea that post-colonial US foreign policy is centered around creating an empire. • Policy is not just referring to the acts of a state but the intent and goals behind that action • Ethical framework: Kantian Deontology, Nonviolence (Christian, Buddhist), International law

8. Affirmation • Ethical framework: Utilitarianism, Hobbes/Lockian Social Contract Theory- state’s sole responsibility was to keep the people safe and secure. Leaders need to represent their people. If they don’t, it is time for them to go. (Libya/Syria)

9. History • Israel targeting Palestinians who kidnapped Isreali Olympic athletes. (movie Munich) • IN 2006 the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that targeted killing is a legitimate form of self-defense and was legal under Israeli law. • France has used it, Russian very recently with Chechnya . Colombia with their civil war but most of these are domestic objectives. For international examples, best bets are Israel and the US.

10. History in the US • US Review Process • Who is a terrorist? • Someone who is funding terrorism, training terrorists don’t qualify. • US is very careful – typically directly involved in killings or actively planning an attack. NOT domestic. An international objective. • Adopted this policy VERY recently. Adopted post 9/11 specifically to combat terrorism.

11. Ayman al-Zahawahiri– Egyptian, Bin Laden’s second in command and his doctor. US received good intelligence and attacked, he wasn’t there and 18 civilians died. • Abu Musab al-Zarqawi – Iraqi operative who US targeted. Used 2 f16 fighter jets. He, his wife and son were killed and pictures were released everywhere. He was very dangerous and killed a lot of people. A child was killed in the process. • Osama bin Laden – Ground troops used. Successful kill, civilians also killed. • Anwar al-Awlaki– Alleged senior Al-Qaeda recruiter and motivator linked to various terrorists; committed to killing Americans and others worldwide. He is a target, but we have missed. Dual citizen of Yemen and US, born in New Mexico. First US citizen that we’ve targeted. Does he have a legal right that we are denying him as a citizen? Due process? Do we care?