PACS 4500 Senior Seminar in Peace and Conflict Studies

1. PACS 4500Senior Seminar in Peace and Conflict Studies Death from Above: Drone Strikes by the United States in the Global War on Terrorism By John Wilson

2. Overview of Principle Parties / Interest Groups A: Pro- Drone Strikes B: Anti- Drone Strikes 3. Governments of countries where drone strikes occur 3 . Allies of the United States 1. Anti – Western Extremists 1. The United States Government 2. Civilians Effected by strikes 2. Non-governmental organizations / Think Tanks 4. Non-governmental organizations / Think Tanks Third Siders 2. Public Opinion of American citizens 3. Public Opinion of civilians in countries where strikes occur 1. Western media Profiteers Drone and Weapons Manufacturers

3. Timeline • Sept. 11th 2001 terrorist attacks prompt US invasion of Afghanistan • Taliban are quickly defeated and ousted from power • Taliban fighters flee to neighboring Pakistan where the Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) provide a safe refuge for Taliban fighters The United States is faced with an insurgency where the enemy fighters have a safe refuge to fight from The inability to decisively defeat the Taliban draw the U.S. into a war that increases Anti-Western radicalism around the world in countries such as: Somalia, Libya and Yemen.

4. Timeline Continued • 2004 – First drone strike in Pakistan successful kills enemy insurgents and drone strikes become an option for killing enemy across the legal border of Pakistan • 2008 – President Obama loosens the targeting requirements for drone strikes from “known enemy combatants” to “suspected enemy combatants.” As a result, drone strikes in Pakistan increase dramatically • 2013 – U.S. Air Force stops releasing public reports of drone strikes. Drone strikes continue to increase in Afghanistan and are expected to continue to increase as U.S. forces withdraw

5. A. 1. The United State Government • It is the job of President Obama, as Commander and Chief of the U.S. Military, to defend the U.S. from terrorism • Drone strikes are used to eliminate individuals suspected as a threat to the USA • Drone strikes are used to eliminate terrorist threats that are in areas inaccessible to U.S. Military forces • The U.S. government views civilian casualties to be an unfortunate but acceptable side effect of the drone strikes • Data provided by the U.S. government regarding drone strikes shows a high degree of accuracy and civilian casualties to be very low • The attacks of September 11th targeted American civilians and the grievances caused from those attacks allow the U.S. government to be less sympathetic to civilian deaths caused by drone attacks • Drone Strikes are popular because they don’t require troop commitment and don’t directly endanger military personnel

6. A. 2. Non-Governmental Organizations and Think Tanks • Pro-drone strike think tanks provide data that supports the use of drone strikes • Data shows high enemy kill rates and very low civilian death rates • This conservative data is then used by members in the U.S. government and western media sources to garner support for drone strikes Click here to go to Website

7. A. 3. Allies of the United States • The governments of Allies to the U.S. involved in the Global War on Terrorism are supportive of drone strikes • The United Kingdom is the primary ally of the United States and has also conducted drone strikes with Royal Air Force aircraft • The UK has had more terrorist attacks (although they have been much less deadly) on its soil by anti–Western extremists and therefore has a vested interest in fighting terrorism. The values, positions and interests of the UK are very similar (if not identical) to those of the United States

8. B. 1. Anti Western Extremists • Anti–Western extremists are the target of drone strikes by the United States • These extremists usually practice a radical version of Islam that calls on its followers to attack Western countries in the name of religion • The deep rooted religious aspect of the extremists makes negotiation and collaboration very difficult • The main interest of these extremists is to eradicate all western influences from their Holy Land, which generally means Middle Eastern countries • Grievances against the US have resulted mainly from the oil industry • Anti-US grievances have been exacerbated by U.S. involvement in Middle Eastern conflicts Right: Abu Yahya al-Libi. Possible successor to Osama Bin Laden. Killed by a drone strike on June 4, 2012

9. B. 2. Civilians Effected by Strikes • Civilian can be affected directly by the strikes by injury, loss of loved ones, displacement and loss of infrastructure, psychological damage, and death • Civilians effected by the strikes create and reinforce anti-U.S. grievances and are counter-productive to a counterterrorism initiative. Left: A protest in reaction to drone strikes killing civilians

10. B. 3. Governments of Countries Where Drone Strikes Occur • Just like the U.S. government, governments in countries where strike occur have a responsibility to protect their citizens and drone strikes challenge that responsibility • Drone strikes challenge the government’s sovereignty as they are conducted without the permission from the government in which they occur • The country most affected by drone strikes is Pakistan, where insurgents reside in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) • The issue is not entirely clear cut for these governments: the Pakistani government is publicly against the attacks but is rumored to support the attacks in secret • Drone strikes often occur in areas where the government does not have regional control and although governments may speak out against the drone strikes they may reluctantly support them in secret due to the radical threat to their own country

11. B. 4. Non-Governmental Organizations and Think Tanks • Studies done by organizations not supported by the United States Government report high civilian death rates • A common figure for actual high value targets killed in drone strikes is less than 2% • These groups are usually focused on seeking the truth in conflict and seeking an end to violence against innocent civilians. • “Living Under Drones” is published by Stanford Law School and NYU school of Law • Click here to view the website • For a report of every drone strike in Pakistan go to: drones.pitchinteractive.com

12. 3rd Sider – 1. Western Media • Western media (the big six corporations that control about 90% of the media in the United States) tend to report on drone strikes in a manner that makes them seem effective in fighting the war on terror • Reports are inline with U.S. government reports Full info graphic available at frugaldad.com

13. 3rd Sider – 2. Public Opinion of American citizens • The size and diversity of the U.S. citizenry cannot allow for a single analysis but lack of an opposition voice to drone strikes suggests that most people in the U.S. either support the drone strikes or are uninformed / apathetic to the issue • Factors that contribute to American public support of drone strikes include: • Grievances resulting from the Sept. 11 attacks • Fear of another terrorist attack • Western media (both in portrayal of Anti U.S. radicals and effectiveness of drone strikes) • Following Presidential leadership

14. 3rd Sider - 3. Public Opinion of Civilians in Countries Where Strikes Occur • This group is separate from civilians effected by the strikes in that that there are not directly effected by drone strikes • Some civilians are in favor or drone strikes, especially if they are against extremists in their country • Overall, drone strikes decease public opinion of the United States • A survey conducted by the Pew Research Center shows that public opinion of the U.S. has decreased with the increase in drone strikes • 74% of Pakistanis call America an enemy Click here to see the full report

15. Profiteers: Drone and Weapons Manufacturers • General Atomic produces the Predator and Reaper drones, the main unmanned aerial vehicles that conduct these strikes. The Predator costs around $4 million and the Reaper about $30 million • According to Opensecrets.org, General Atomics spent over $3 million on campaign contributions and lobbying in the U.S. in 2013. This influence can be seen as a reinforcement mechanism for drone attacks Click here to go to website • Weapons costs for the payloads of drones range from $25,000 to $150,000. The most common weapon is the Hellfire missile produced by Lockheed Martin, a known heavy hitter in U.S. lobbying. Lockheed spend over $15 million lobbing in 2012 Click here to go to website

16. Legend This legend will assist in understanding the dynamics in the following slides Friend Ally Adversary Exacerbating Dynamic Enemy Ameliorating Dynamic Other (Mark, Client?) Danger Point Neutral Causality Negative feedback system (de-escalation) or Positive feedback system (escalation) Positive: an increase in A causes an increase in B Party B Group 1 Party A Group 1 Negative: an increase in A causes a decrease in B

17. Drone Strike Dynamics: Main Conflict Drone strikes create a reinforcing feedback loop that increases the animosity between Anti-Western Extremists and the U.S. Government DRONE STRIKES Anti – Western Extremists The United States Government The increase in grievances against the U.S. by those effected by drone strikes results in increased fear in the United States and thus more drone strikes Increase in grievances against the US

18. Drone Strike Dynamics: Pro-Drone Strike Side This map shows a reinforcement of support from drone strikes within the pro-drone strike side Public Opinion of American citizens Western media (Pro drone strikes) The United States Government Non-governmental organizations / Think Tanks (Pro drone strikes) Allies of the United States Drone and Weapons Manufacturers

19. Drone Strike Dynamics: Anti- Drone Strike Side Governments of countries where drone strikes occur This map shows a reinforcement of support against drone strikes on the anti- drone strike side. The relationship between governments and anti-western extremists varies between ally and enemy. Dynamic Varies Anti – Western Extremists Non-governmental organizations / Think Tanks (Against drone Strikes) Civilians Effected by strikes Public Opinion of Civilians in countries where strikes occur

20. Drone Strike Dynamics Across Sides This map shows that civilian casualties can decrease support of drone strikes in the United States though reporting from non-governmental organizations and think tanks that are against drone strikes. However this dynamic must be stronger than the reinforcing dynamic seen on the pro-drone strike slide Dynamic Varies Public Opinion of American citizens Civilians Effected by strikes The United States Government Non-governmental organizations / Think Tanks (Against drone Strikes)

21. Arguments and Counterarguments for Drone Strikes • Drone strikes do not risk U.S. military personnel • U.S. military personnel are killed in retribution attacks after drone strikes. The recent increase in “insider attacks” against U.S. military personnel are a clear example • Civilian casualty rates are misleading. Many “civilians” are enemy insurgents because bad guys tend to be surrounded by other bad guys • While this is true, bad guys also surround themselves with innocent women and children • The blowback from civilian casualties is acceptable given the danger posed by the enemy killed • There has not been another successful attack on U.S. soil since Sept.11th and drone strikes have likely stopped such an attack. However, this does not mean that the world is safer due to the high number of drone strikes • Drone strikes have unfortunate consequences, but they are the best solution to the problem of the FATA • This is a popular argument but it is clearly flawed. One better solution would be to better support the Pakistani government in apprehending and prosecuting radicals who pose a threat to the United States

22. Path Forward Dealing with Drone Strikes can be categorized into three main areas: • Ending drone strikes that kill civilians • Establishing alternatives to dealing with anti-western extremists • Deal with the negative consequences of drone strikes

23. Ending Drone Strikes That Kill Civilians • Targeting requirements for drone strikes must include only killing known enemy combatants • Military personnel on the ground must confirm the identity and location of enemy combatants before drone strike are authorized • This means drone strikes can only occur in countries where the United States has committed troops • Drone strikes should only be used when piloted air support is not available • There needs to be an overall reduction in the reliance of air support by U.S. military personnel in theater

24. Alternatives to Drone Strikes • Alternatives to dealing with anti-western extremism must take a system based approach that looks at the core issues of the problem. Some examples of core issues are: • Inequality and poverty • Inability for countries like Pakistan to secure tribal regions • United States dependence on oil Some possible ways to deal with the above core issues: • Humanitarian aid and economic development programs in areas that harbor anti-western extremists • Work with governments like Pakistan to secure lawless areas through internal support • Seek alternative sources of energy outside of the Middle East

25. Dealing With the Aftermath • Drone strikes have caused considerable damage in foreign relations of the United States and people who have been negatively effected by drone strikes • Action must be taken to prevent the spread of anti-western extremism as a result of drone strikes Possible actions: • Trauma healing initiatives • Truth and reconciliation commissions • Community dialogs