Tag Archive | "drone warfare"

Critical Analysis: Drone Strikes in Pakistan Surge in the Summer

Though the news media is seemingly all eyes on the Olympics this week, drones have been making magazine covers and headlines as attacks on militants in Pakistan have escalated during the summer and days before a visit to Washington by Pakistan’s intelligence chief.

Drones over Pakistan
(South Asian Tribune)

Drones, also known as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), are what their proper name implies: aircraft without a human pilot on board. The machines are either controlled autonomously through computers or under the remote control of a pilot on the ground. Although U.S. drone operations in Pakistan have been ongoing since 2004, drones have become an especially popular tool of the U.S. military during the Obama Administration. This summer in particular has seen a markedly sharp increase in U.S. drone operations in Pakistan. Following the failure to strike a deal to end a six-month blockade on convoys transporting supplies to coalition forces in Afghanistan at the Chicago Nation Summit in May, not a week goes by that there isn’t some report of a drone attack on a militant compound. In July alone, U.S. drone operations killed more than 20 militants.

However, Pakistan has not responded in kind to the attacks. Just days before the most recent strike, Pakistan’s U.S. ambassador officially called for the end of U.S. drone strikes, citing diminishing returns. Instead, Pakistan would like the U.S. to feed intelligence fathered by the drones to Pakistani forces, so that they can target militants.

The turn to drones by the U.S. comes from what U.S. officials perceive as the incapability or unwillingness of Pakistan to target militants; providing shelter to Taliban groups in both Pakistan’s tribal areas and attack troops in nearby Afghanistan. Pakistan’s ambassador called such claims “outrageous,” citing the fact that Pakistan reported 53 times to NATO in recent months when militants were spotted crossing into Afghan territory.  Nevertheless, in the wake of these opposing stances as to Pakistan’s fulfillment of its state responsibilities, little is expected to come out of this week’s  closed door discussions between head of Pakistan’s ISI spy agency and CIA director David Petraeus.

Beyond the flood of privacy concerns and humanitarian interests drowning much of the discussion on drones in the media, questions of state sovereignty and state responsibility are at the heart of the U.S.-Pakistan drone dispute.  On one hand, the U.S. drone operations may be seen as a violation of the sovereignty of Pakistan, what with the U.S. attacking militants on Pakistan’s soil without the consent of the country. Meanwhile, the U.S. claims to be applying drones in the name of self-defense after the failure of Pakistan to uphold its obligations under U.N. General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV), which establishes state responsibility to refrain from supporting acts of terrorism.  At the same time, the U.S. must still adhere to Article 51 of the U.N. Charter when invoking  the right to self-defense under the doctrine of state responsibility. Seeing as the CIA is operating the drone operations, and not a traditional military branch of the U.S. Government, the legitimacy of the U.S. actions are called into question. With Russia and other countries now stockpiling drones, the U.S.-Pakistan drone dispute may very well set precedent for the future of all drone operations.

Cassandra Kirsch is a rising third year law student and a Staff Editor on The View From Above.

Posted in 1TVFA Posts, 2Featured Articles, Cassandra Kirsch, DJILP StaffComments (0)

You want to shoot our drones down now, Iran?

Occasionally alarming drones stories cross my desk. Up until this morning, this one ranked as #1 most alarming: “‘Flesh-eating robot’ is actually a vegetarian, say inventors.”

In an attempt to reassure the reader, the inventors add this gem of a quote: “The … Energetically Autonomous Tactical Robot – known as Eatr for short – does indeed power its “biomass engine” by digesting organic material, but that it is not intended to chomp its way through battlefields of fallen soldiers.” That is just great.  Eatr is not intended to devour humans, but as it gobbles up a hedgerow to sate its appetite it obviously may unintentionally scoop up a human or two in the process.

Energetically Autonomous Tactical Robot

So the Eatr article sat comfortably at number 1 for many weeks until this morning: “US draws up plans for nuclear drones.”  The Guardian article states that “American scientists have drawn up plans for a new generation of nuclear-powered drones capable of flying over remote regions of the world for months on end without re-fuelling.”  Remote regions? What, are we going to start flying drones over Western Sahara?

Most of our drones are deployed in Iraq, Pakistan and Yemen.  By my count a fair number of folks live there. And these drones crash “a lot” says Chris Coles of Drone Wars UK.  Do we really want to further infuriate inhabitants of these countries by flying nuclear materials over them?

The stated appeal of nuclearizing drones is to enhance their ability to fly for long periods of time without refueling.  But one wonders whether a second motivation is to create a huge disincentive for countries like Iran in shooting down a drone like they did last December.

 

Posted in 1TVFA Posts, 2Featured Articles, David AkersonComments (0)

Predator Drone

An epiphany on killer drones

Predator Drone

Predator Drone

I am currently finishing an article on autonomous killer drones – military robots that can go out, identify and kill enemy combatants without human supervision.  They don’t exist yet, but technology is inching us closer to that day.  54 countries are developing military robots and autonomy is a hot feature.

My paper argues that autonomous killer robots are illegal under international humanitarian law because various IHL provisions require the exercise of discretion in combat, a quality I argue that robots lack.

One argument against this position is while robots don’t possess human-like discretion, they also don’t possess human-like foibles such as temper, volatility, fear, anxiety or revenge.  These emotions conspire to cause soldiers to lose their cool in the heat of battle.  It is often argued that a major advantage robots have over humans is that they can fire second.

This ability to fire second was the source of my epiphany.  It occurred to me that a Monitor and Merrimack moment is looming, a time when two enemy autonomous robots first meet in combat.  But what if both robots are programmed to fire second?  They may approach and circle each other, waiting in vain for the other to initiate the use of force.  Peace may break out, unless some human intervenes to save the day.

Posted in 1TVFA Posts, 2Featured Articles, David AkersonComments (5)


University of Denver Sturm College of Law

Posts by Date

November 2017
M T W T F S S
« Oct    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  
Resources