Mizui | 1

Ray Mizui

Ms. Russell

AP Government

6/2/17

The Best of the Worst: The Need to Continue Drone Strikes

1. The Rise of Terror

By the time the United States and its allies ended combat operations in Iraq and

Afghanistan, many around the world believed that they had defeated the enemy that was

responsible for one of the worst attacks on U.S. soil in history. Beaten down by a joint coalition

of military force and new types of intelligence gathering, the threat al-Qaeda carried in the

Middle East and across the globe has sputtered. However, since the Arab Spring in 2011, a new

power has risen from the ashes: the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

The attacks in San Bernardino, Paris, Orlando, and now Manchester have caused the

West once again to focus on the threat that terrorist groups pose to its security and way of life.

These groups have provoked the worlds powers to increase their military efforts against ISIS

and other extremist organizations. ISIS has inadvertently revealed the fallacy of the notion that

they can be indefinitely contained within a majority Muslim part of the word. These tragedies

have once again forced the United States to question their role in the Middle East, and to discuss

possible responses that are required to protect their people and their way of life.

The United States can not afford to send in another million plus troops to defeat a

terrorist organization, as that would ultimately lead to another decade long war. However,

advances in military technology have allowed the United States to use remotely-controlled

aircraft capable of firing missiles towards specific targets without the deployment of military
 Mizui | 2

personnel. Many of these sophisticated machines, known as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, or

drones, have been used in the United States War on Terror, with strikes in Afghanistan,

Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen.

1.1 How Drone Strikes Work

These drones are either controlled by the Central Intelligence Agency, or experienced Air

Force pilots under the military's Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC).

Once the drones are in the air, the controls are switched to a set of "reachback operators"

in the United States (Bowden). The operators use joysticks that resemble old video game

controllers while watching a live video feed from the drones camera on a large monitor

(Bowden). A stream of additional "intelligence" sent by the National Security Agency gives

further confirmation that a target has been correctly identified (Saletan). Final approval for

strikes is delegated to CIA and JSOC officials (Saletan). This lengthy process and the careful

procedure each drone strike goes through ensures that there is minimal collateral damage.

The use of these Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in military combat must be continued in the

fight against extremist organizations as they are able to decimate terrorist networks with lower

civilian death rates than other conventional forms of weaponry, while being legal under

international law.

2. Machinery Over Manpower

During former President Obamas eight years in office, the United States relied heavily

on drone strikes in the Middle East to combat terrorism. This dependence on machinery rather

than manpower proved extremely successful, according to the New America Foundation and the

Brookings Institute. U.S. drones have killed over 3,000 al-Qaeda, Taliban, and other jihadist
 Mizui | 3

militants located in Pakistan and Yemen, including 50 senior operatives from al-Qaeda and the

Taliban (Byman).

The deaths of their leaders has crippled both organizations, forcing them to retreat into

reclusive areas where drones are unlikely to strike. An American counterterrorism expert

believes that core [al-Qaeda] is a rump of its former self due to the constant drone strikes near

al-Qaeda strongholds (Walsh). Furthermore, a Pakistani official located in Peshawar states that

drone strikes have destroyed the infrastructure of al-Qaeda, and that, They are in disarray,

trying to reorganize but struggling to find people capable of leading the organization (Walsh).

These drone strikes are also able to destroy extremist organizations by eliminating

thousands of insurgents that are lower down on the food chain, but specialize in specific

trades, such as forging passports, making bombs, fundraising, and recruiting (Byman).

Drone strikes can also hinder a terrorist group's ability to train new recruits and to

communicate with other members, as using electronic devices or gathering in large groups would

attract a drones attention (Byman). This forces the militants to maintain complete silence of all

wireless contacts and avoid gathering in open areas (Byman). However, training new recruits

in the open is almost impossible with the threat of a drone strike lingering above. The Brookings

Institute credits these drone strikes as a primary factor for the fall of al-Qaedas command and

training centers, causing the once-dominant extremist group to choose between having no

leaders and risking dead leaders (Byman). The U.S. now needs to ramp up its aggressiveness

against new groups of extremist terror, such as ISIS, to avoid further international conflict.

Drones are the perfect piece of machinery to quickly search and destroy extremists, creating fear

within the insurgency.

3. The Best of the Worst

 Mizui | 4

Sadly, most armed conflicts, especially against insurgent forces, result in many civilian

deaths. This is partly due to the fact that the insurgents hide in cities within the civilian

population, making a ground troop invasion incredibly risky. Unfortunately, the U.S. has had it

fair share of civilian casualties, caused by conventional weapons. In 1991, the Gulf War was

home to the Al-Firdos bunker incident killed around 400 people, all civilians (Lewis). Civilian

casualties during the Iraq War included the Nisour Square Massacre in 2007, and a cruise missile

strike in 2009 that killed nearly 50 civilians at al-Majalah in Yemen (Lewis). Like any other type

of weapon, drones have caused civilian deaths. However, they dramatically reduce civilian

casualties in armed conflicts, and particularly against insurgent forces.

Drones are able to follow suspected targets for weeks, allowing U.S. military personnel to

correctly identify the target, which in turn reduces the chance of striking a civilian due to false

information (Saletan). This also allows operators back in the United States to predict when a

target will be isolated in order to carry out a strike that will not impact or endanger civilians.

As drones are remote controlled, the decision to drop a missile strike can be reviewed in

real time by lawyers, intelligence analysts, and senior commanders, further ensuring that any

civilian lives will not be lost (Lewis). More importantly, the person behind the controls are not

harmed physically by the insurgents, lessening the possibility that a concern for safety will lead

to a missile being dropped when it shouldnt have.

A 2008 report by Human Rights Watch found that, Civilian casualties rarely occur

during planned airstrikes on suspected targets. Instead, High civilian loss of life during

airstrikes has almost always occurred during the fluid, rapid-response strikes, often carried out in

support of ground troops after they came under insurgent attack (Saletan). Since the use of
 Mizui | 5

drone strikes increasingly became the weapon of choice during President Obamas

administration, civilian casualty rates have dropped significantly.

In 2015, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism reported that during former President

Obamas 8 years in office, a mere 14% of all casualties from drone strikes in Pakistan, Somalia,

and Yemen were civilians (Obama Drone Casualty Numbers). In the Gulf War, where massive

ground troop involvement and manned airstrikes were the norm, one or two Iraqi soldiers were

killed for every dead Iraqi civilian (Saletan). Those statistics, coupled with the fact that drone

strikes and their operators take incredibly careful measures to minimize the civilian casualty rate,

proves the necessity for drones over manpower when combating terrorism across the globe.

4. International Law

While some argue that the use of drone strikes breaches international law and that the

process for targeting these extremists is inaccurate and leads to unlawful killing, the United

States and other countries can justify these killings with a specific piece of world legislation: the

UN Charter.

The UN Charter is meant to be the rule book for the world, and most countries have

stayed away from breaking the rules written in the law. Article 51, Section 1 of the UN Charter

states, Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective

self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations (Groves). The

article applies if the country in question agrees to the use of force within its territory, or when the

targeted insurgency is operating within the countrys territory and is either unwilling or unable to

rid the threat themselves (Carafano). Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia have either

officially or secretly given consent to the White House that drone strikes within their territory

because they are unable to control the terrorist organizations (Carafano). As the United States
 Mizui | 6

has complied with these regulations, and has been given permission to conduct drone strikes in

the four countries, the legality of drone strikes is fully proven.

5. The Necessary Evil

As the threat from ISIS and other insurgent groups begin to expand further West, the

United States needs to be able to continue its use of drone strikes to counter their presence,

especially in the Middle East. Drone strikes are the best form of military combat when fighting a

terrorist organization, and the United States needs to continue this program, as the strikes

decimate insurgent groups with minimal civilian casualties when compared to other forms of

warfare while they are legal under international law. They are the least deadly form of combat

when viewing civilian death rates, and are extremely efficient at eliminating terror threats across

the globe. The United States has complied with UN regulations, meaning that the strikes are

completely lawful. The drone program must continue during President Trumps reign in office in

order to fight the growing threat of extremism, in order to protect the lives of innocent civilians

and to bring democracy to countries who have been crippled by terrorism and fear.

Bibliography

Bergen, Peter. Time to Declare Victory: Al Qaeda Is Defeated (Opinion). CNN, Cable News

Network, 27 June 2012,security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/27/

time-to-declare-victory-al-qaeda-is-defeated-opinion/. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Bowden, Mark. The Killing Machines. The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 19 Feb. 2014,
 Mizui | 7

www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/09/the-killing-machines-how-to-think-

about-drones/309434/. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Byman, Daniel L. Why Drones Work: The Case for Washingtons Weapon of Choice |

Brookings Institution. Brookings, Brookings, 28 July 2016,

www.brookings.edu/articles/why-drones-work-the-case-for-washingtons-weapon-of-

choice/. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Carafano, James Jay. Say What You Want About DronesThey'Re Perfectly Legal. The

Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 26 Aug. 2013,

www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/say-what-you-want-about-drones-

theyre-perfectly-legal/278740/. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Cassis, Tewfik. A Brief History of ISIS. The Week - All You Need to Know about Everything

That Matters, 21 Nov. 2015, theweek.com/articles/589924/brief-history-isis. Accessed 1

June 2017.

Fisher, Ian. The Rise of ISIS. The Week - All You Need to Know about Everything That

Matters, 27 Nov. 2015, theweek.com/articles/589978/rise-isis. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Groves, Steven. Drone Strikes: The Legality of U.S. Targeting Terrorists Abroad. The

Heritage

Foundation, www.heritage.org/terrorism/report/drone-strikes-the-legality-us-

targeting-terrorists-abroad. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Institute for the Study of War and Critical Threats Project. Experts Examine the US Strategy for

Defeating ISIS and Al Qaeda. Business Insider, Business Insider, 14 Jan. 2016,

www.businessinsider.com/experts-examine-the-us-strategy-for-defeating-isis-and-al-

qaeda-2016-1. Accessed 1 June 2017.

 Mizui | 8

Lewis, Michael W. Drones: Actually the Most Humane Form of Warfare Ever. The Atlantic,

Atlantic Media Company, 21 Aug. 2013,

www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/drones-actually-the-most-humane-

form-of-warfare-ever/278746/. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Saletan, William. Civilian Deaths Would Be Much Higher Without Drones. Slate Magazine,

24

Apr. 2015, www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2015/04/u_s_drone_

strikes_civilian_casualties_would_be_much_higher_without_them.html. Accessed 1 June

2017.

Saletan, William. Drones Are the Worst Form of War, Except for All the Others. Slate

Magazine, 19 Feb. 2013, www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science

/human_nature/2013/02/drones_war_and_civilian_casualties_how_unmanned_aircraft_re

duce_collateral.html. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Serle, Jack. Obama Drone Casualty Numbers a Fraction of Those Recorded by the Bureau.

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 22 Feb.

2017, www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2016-07-01/obama-drone-casualty

-numbers-a-fraction-of-those-recorded-by-the-bureau. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Walsh, Declan. Drone Strikes on Al Qaeda Are Said to Take Toll on Leadership in

Pakistan.The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Apr. 2015,

www.nytimes.com/2015/04/25/world/asia/cia-qaeda-drone-strikes-warren-weinstein-

giovanni-lo-porto-deaths.html?_r=1. Accessed 1 June 2017.

Yousefzai, Zmarak. Voice of a Native Son: Drones May Be a Necessary Evil. Foreign Policy,

15 Oct. 2012, foreignpolicy.com/2012/10/15/voice-of-a-native-son-drones-may-

 Mizui | 9

be-a-necessary-evil/. Accessed 1 June 2017.