Is the use of drones in the target killing of suspected terrorists lawful?
According to The Huffington Post, ninety percent of people killed by drones in the last 5 years were innocent civilians (Fang, 2015). Many countries currently possess drones, which they use either for military or civilian use. Also known as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, drones constitute a technological advancement and are used for many purposes in daily life. In the military, these pilotless aerial vehicles provide military personnel with the ability to conduct reconnaissance easily and continuously and to carry out lethal attacks with improved precision. In this regard, drones are today used by US led international coalition against terrorism purposely for targeting and …show more content…
According to Schakle, drones create a sense of looming danger and fear to the local populations (Shackle, 2012). The fear of death has a destabilizing effect, which can also lead to trauma. For instance, Shackle (2012) indicates that as a result of the killing of guiltless civilians in Waziristan (Pakistan), local hospitals report a sharp increase in the figure of people needing treatment for trauma sicknesses. The Target killing of terrorists by the anti-terror coalition members is designed to target only members of terrorist armed groups. However, the kind of fear that drones create in the local community due to likelihood of collateral damage is another negative consequence of the operation that they should not continue to …show more content…
However, concerns over incidences where they harm innocent civilian, infringe international law and have political and moral consequences are factors that need further scrutiny for the success of the war against terror that the international coalition forces are conducting. This paper showed that the use of lethal force by any given state can legally allowed either during an armed conflict, while observing the principles of IHL or can be used in case of self-defense as per the UN Charter. Any other use of force by state armed forces may be considered to be illegal. The target killing of Al Qaeda terrorists was hence observed to have legal gaps because it may neither be assumed that this operation constitutes an armed conflict in the sense of IHL principles. This operation cannot also be considered to be exercised in the framework of self-defense as per the UN Charter because they fail to fulfill required conditions for self-defense. Based on the lack of these legal requirements, it can be stated that drones’ strikes carried out in the counter-terror campaign are illegal, although the operation has been justified by the need to ensure terrorists are neutralized. These legal gaps must be clarified in order to allow drone attacks to be legitimate. The anti-terror coalition member states should
According to The Huffington Post, ninety percent of people killed by drones in the last 5 years were innocent civilians (Fang, 2015). Many countries currently possess drones, which they use either for military or civilian use. Also known as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, drones constitute a technological advancement and are used for many purposes in daily life. In the military, these pilotless aerial vehicles provide military personnel with the ability to conduct reconnaissance easily and continuously and to carry out lethal attacks with improved precision. In this regard, drones are today used by US led international coalition against terrorism purposely for targeting and …show more content…
According to Schakle, drones create a sense of looming danger and fear to the local populations (Shackle, 2012). The fear of death has a destabilizing effect, which can also lead to trauma. For instance, Shackle (2012) indicates that as a result of the killing of guiltless civilians in Waziristan (Pakistan), local hospitals report a sharp increase in the figure of people needing treatment for trauma sicknesses. The Target killing of terrorists by the anti-terror coalition members is designed to target only members of terrorist armed groups. However, the kind of fear that drones create in the local community due to likelihood of collateral damage is another negative consequence of the operation that they should not continue to …show more content…
However, concerns over incidences where they harm innocent civilian, infringe international law and have political and moral consequences are factors that need further scrutiny for the success of the war against terror that the international coalition forces are conducting. This paper showed that the use of lethal force by any given state can legally allowed either during an armed conflict, while observing the principles of IHL or can be used in case of self-defense as per the UN Charter. Any other use of force by state armed forces may be considered to be illegal. The target killing of Al Qaeda terrorists was hence observed to have legal gaps because it may neither be assumed that this operation constitutes an armed conflict in the sense of IHL principles. This operation cannot also be considered to be exercised in the framework of self-defense as per the UN Charter because they fail to fulfill required conditions for self-defense. Based on the lack of these legal requirements, it can be stated that drones’ strikes carried out in the counter-terror campaign are illegal, although the operation has been justified by the need to ensure terrorists are neutralized. These legal gaps must be clarified in order to allow drone attacks to be legitimate. The anti-terror coalition member states should