Drone technology does more harm than good

0
461

BW-Drone-Courtesy of the US Air Force-Wikimedia Commons

Creating distrust and hostility in civilian populations

By Harleen Khangura
Photos by Wikimedia Commons

President Obama’s National Defence speech on May 23 has sparked a greater interest and debate on US facilitated drone attacks aimed towards eliminating high-ranking terrorists in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen.

According to the New America Foundation, American drones have killed 55 known Al-Qaeda leaders or affiliates in Pakistan since the advent of their use in 2004. In other words, this technology has apparently successfully hindered many terror plots that could have catastrophic for the United States — possibly even Canada — with relative ease and low cost in comparison to conventional military options.

However, the use of drones has a major drawback: they result in civilian casualties often crudely referred to as “collateral damage.” In Pakistan, the civilian and unknown casualty rate was about 11 per cent in 2012, while the civilian casualty rate over the course of drone usage in Yemen has been between 3.2 to 8.9 per cent.

Arguably, the rates are lower in comparison to the countless civilian fatalities that may have resulted had Al-Qaeda or Taliban leaders been left to their designs. But the loss of innocent lives in countries targeted by drones has serious repercussions, specifically the radicalization of civilians, which cannot be overlooked.

Since the beginning of their use, drone attacks have alienated civilians in Pakistan against the American government. About 60 per cent of those polled in Pakistan’s tribal regions — the main target area for drones — have expressed support for suicide attacks against the US military. More people, especially relatives of victims, are joining militant groups; when terrorists are targeted by drones and civilian life is lost, it inspires individuals to join terrorism.

This is true about home-grown terror as well. We’ve seen the terror suspects of recent attacks in Boston and London cite US wars in the Middle East or attacks on Muslim lands as impetuses for their extremist acts.

These individuals maintain the questionable perception that US military operations, including drones, as an indication of American hostility towards their countries or religion. This perception is further exacerbated by the discrepancy in civilian casualty numbers claimed by US government officials and those circulated by news reports or local civilians, fuelling feelings of mistrust and hostility towards the US.

However, civilian hostility in Pakistan or Yemen is not directed solely at the US government. Many, if not most, Pakistani and Yemeni civilians are aggravated at their government for being unwilling or powerless in stopping the strikes from taking place, resulting in greater political, economic, and social instability — a fecund environment for terrorist groups to seize control over regions, further their doctrine, and recruit politically and financially aggrieved individuals.

Of course, the US drone program has its benefits, and its use is even necessary to hinder and eliminate difficult-to-capture terrorists who pose immediate threats to Western and foreign lives. However, in order to tackle the root cause of radicalization for many individuals, the American government needs to focus on countering the drones’ detrimental impact on the lives of civilians affected by the strikes.

This involves placing greater restrictions on the use of drones, and co-ordinating with the foreign governments in providing aid to families of victims, establishing schools, employment training programs, and medical facilities in efforts to stabilize areas that have been hit, as well as deter alienated or poverty-stricken individuals from joining militant groups.

Further collaboration with the Pakistani or Yemeni government and military is necessary to alleviate hostility towards the US, improve civilian trust in the capabilities of their local government, and relieve the political and economic instability that results from drone attacks.
Otherwise, the drone program runs the risk of creating more hostility and distrust in those whom it involves.

Leave a Reply