Other Interested Parties
|
Other Countries Seeking to Use Drone Technology
Analysts are increasingly concerned that the United States will set a precedent for using armed drones in non-battlefield settings. The United States, Israel, Pakistan, and the United Kingdom are best known for having conducted drone strikes, but several other countries have as well. A growing number of countries have stated a desire or intent to acquire drones or are already in the process of developing them. As of 2021, thirty-nine countries have armed drones. Twenty-seven countries currently host drone bases, and fifteen countries have training academies for drone operators. Drone use has even extended to nonstate groups, most notably in Syria by the self-proclaimed Islamic State and in the yearslong conflict between Yemen’s Houthi rebels and a Saudi-led international coalition. The Houthi rebels, a nonstate group with Iranian backing, have launched several drone and missile attacks against Saudi-led coalition forces. In September 2019, for instance, the Houthis sent ten drones to strike facilities in Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich Eastern Province, prompting a rise in crude oil prices. The United States and major European powers blamed Iran for coordinating the strikes. |
|
|
European Allies
Al-Qaeda and AQAP have launched terrorist attacks on U.S. allies in Europe, such as the 2004 train bombings in Madrid, the 2005 attack on London’s transportation system, and the 2015 Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris. European countries have partnered extensively with U.S. counterterrorism efforts and have launched armed drone strikes of their own. Both France and the United Kingdom have used UAVs in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, and five other European countries have armed drones in their military. However, those countries have largely refrained from becoming involved in non-battlefield counterterrorism operations, such as those in Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen—likely because the United States is already taking action, but also to avoid entanglement in targeted killing operations that are highly controversial throughout the European Union. As in the United States, drones remain a controversial issue among policymakers and the public alike. Citizens have criticized their governments for their military drone operations, and some governments have fiercely debated drone use, non-battlefield targeted killings, and how to conduct proper oversight. European countries have criticized the extent of U.S. drone use as well. In 2014, the European Parliament adopted a resolution condemning U.S. drone strikes, and European governments sharply criticized the United States’ killing of Qasem Soleimani in January 2020. However, European governments also see the benefit in their use; the attorney general of the United Kingdom said in 2017, “So we really want to see the principles [of preemptive self-defense] that the U.S. has already adopted, which we think strikes the right balance of all the different factors.” Despite the EU’s condemnation of drone use, Europe’s individual countries have largely continued to acquire and increasingly use armed drones. |
|
International Institutions
International institutions, primarily the United Nations, have taken an interest in U.S. counterterrorism operations. Philip Alston, the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions, wrote a report on the legality of targeted killings [PDF] for the UN Human Rights Council, finding that targeted killings represent a significant challenge to the international rule of law. Alston’s successor, Christof Heyns, also released a report [PDF] condemning certain aspects of armed drones. In a 2019 statement to the UN General Assembly, twenty-nine nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) condemned the lack of accountability in a world increasingly reliant on drones. In May 2018, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said of drone use, “We need common standards to promote accountability, transparency, and oversight.” Similarly, China, a bilateral trade and investment partner of Pakistan, has commented on expanded armed drones use, saying that a “blank space in international law” is “subject to abuse.” China is a top exporter of drones, alongside Israel and the United States, and dominates the global market for small drones.
Additionally, the International Criminal Court (ICC) reports on armed drones use and has investigated possible war crimes resulting from U.S drone strikes. In a 2013 report addressing U.S. drones use in Pakistan, the ICC claimed, “Very serious concerns arise that drone strikes may have involved the commission of grave crimes falling within the jurisdiction of the Court.” However, the court has not filed charges on any U.S. officials for using drones.
Human Rights Groups
Human rights organizations have exhorted the United States to introduce more transparency and accountability into their drone practices, while some have advised Washington to end its drone strikes altogether. Human Rights Watch has denounced U.S. drone strikes since 2009 and in recent years has sharply criticized the U.S. civilian casualty toll, relaxation of standards, rate of inaccuracy in identifying targets, and immediate elimination of threat requirement. James Ross, the legal and policy director at Human Rights Watch, said, “So long as the U.S. resists public accountability for CIA drone strikes, the agency should not be conducting targeted killings.” Amnesty International has told other international organizations to “refrain from participating in any way in U.S. drone strikes, including by sharing intelligence or facilities, conducted in violation of international human rights law and, where applicable in specific zones of armed conflict, international humanitarian law.” It has requested civil society participation in the creation of standards for armed drones. The Red Cross has addressed the ethics of drone use, saying, “The greater physical distance between the operator’s location and the target also seems to increase the moral distance between the parties to the conflict.”
International institutions, primarily the United Nations, have taken an interest in U.S. counterterrorism operations. Philip Alston, the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions, wrote a report on the legality of targeted killings [PDF] for the UN Human Rights Council, finding that targeted killings represent a significant challenge to the international rule of law. Alston’s successor, Christof Heyns, also released a report [PDF] condemning certain aspects of armed drones. In a 2019 statement to the UN General Assembly, twenty-nine nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) condemned the lack of accountability in a world increasingly reliant on drones. In May 2018, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said of drone use, “We need common standards to promote accountability, transparency, and oversight.” Similarly, China, a bilateral trade and investment partner of Pakistan, has commented on expanded armed drones use, saying that a “blank space in international law” is “subject to abuse.” China is a top exporter of drones, alongside Israel and the United States, and dominates the global market for small drones.
Additionally, the International Criminal Court (ICC) reports on armed drones use and has investigated possible war crimes resulting from U.S drone strikes. In a 2013 report addressing U.S. drones use in Pakistan, the ICC claimed, “Very serious concerns arise that drone strikes may have involved the commission of grave crimes falling within the jurisdiction of the Court.” However, the court has not filed charges on any U.S. officials for using drones.
Human Rights Groups
Human rights organizations have exhorted the United States to introduce more transparency and accountability into their drone practices, while some have advised Washington to end its drone strikes altogether. Human Rights Watch has denounced U.S. drone strikes since 2009 and in recent years has sharply criticized the U.S. civilian casualty toll, relaxation of standards, rate of inaccuracy in identifying targets, and immediate elimination of threat requirement. James Ross, the legal and policy director at Human Rights Watch, said, “So long as the U.S. resists public accountability for CIA drone strikes, the agency should not be conducting targeted killings.” Amnesty International has told other international organizations to “refrain from participating in any way in U.S. drone strikes, including by sharing intelligence or facilities, conducted in violation of international human rights law and, where applicable in specific zones of armed conflict, international humanitarian law.” It has requested civil society participation in the creation of standards for armed drones. The Red Cross has addressed the ethics of drone use, saying, “The greater physical distance between the operator’s location and the target also seems to increase the moral distance between the parties to the conflict.”