DronesU.S. worries about proliferation of drone technology

Published 23 October 2013

A new Amnesty International report about U.S. drone use in the war on terror says that the drone campaign is killing so many civilians, that it does not only violate international law, but may be a war crime. The report also says that the growing use of drones by the United States in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia encourages their use by other states and groups. The United States rejects the figures of civilian casualties cited in the Amnesty report as unreliable, and says that the research methodology the report’s authors used is deeply flawed. The United States does agree, however, that there is a reason to worry about the proliferation of drone technology. “Going forward this is a technology that we know more people will probably get access to,” a State Department spokeswoman said.

Human rights lawyers used the occasion of the release of an Amnesty International report about U.S. drone strikes to warn that in addition to killing many civilians, the growing use of drones by the United States in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia encourages their use by other states and groups.

The Guardian quotes Andrea Prasow, a counter-terrorism lawyer with Human Rights Watch, to say that the Amnesty International report offers evidence of drone strikes against civilians which showed breaches of international conventions which could be exploited by hostile countries using similar technology.

The failure to abide by international law sets a dangerous precedent for other countries,” Prasow told reporters.

Naureen Shah of Amnesty said that there are growing concerns in legal circles that indiscriminate U.S. strikes will make it harder to restrain such countries in future.

Drone technology is proliferating rapidly. The US government should be careful of the signal that it is sending to the world,” she said. “It’s time to end the black hole of accountability on drone strikes. The U.S. is behaving like a hit-and-run driver.”

The United States rejects the figures of civilian casualties cited in the Amnesty report as unreliable, and says that the research methodology the report’s authors used is deeply flawed, and that it was designed in a way that could only confirm the authors’ preconceived notions about the use of drones.

The United States does agree, however, that there is a reason to worry about the proliferation of drone technology.

Going forward this is a technology that we know more people will probably get access to,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf told the Guardian.

This is not just about when we decide to use this technology but when other countries do to. This is at the forefront of our counterterrorism officials’ minds and something we will certainly be discussing.”

The State Department repeated earlier U.S. assertions that civilian deaths as a result of U.S. drone strikes are “much lower” than NGO estimates.

Our intelligence community has ways to get information across the board that gives a much more complete picture than one or two groups can get from talking to folks on the ground,” said Harf.

The United States has insisted that very few civilians have been killed by drones, and argues that the drone campaign against terrorists is lawful. Harf stressed that the United States “took every effort to minimise civilian casualties in counter-terrorism operations” and said drones were “often the option least likely to result in the loss of civilian lives.”