Serial Murder by Drone

Obama allows the death penalty against Pakistan to stand.

At least 16 people were killed by a U.S. drone attack in northwest Pakistan on Wednesday. A similar attack the day before killed six. Yesterday’s attack was directed at a group of houses in the Baber Ghar area of South Waziristan. According to eyewitness reports, five unmanned drones fired 10 rockets in the attack. Tuesday’s attack took place near Miranshah, capital of North Waziristan. According to Pakistani security forces, all the victims were local rebels whose identities are unknown.

Since taking office in January 2009, Barack Obama has expanded the use of unmanned drones against targets in Pakistan. According to the AFP news agency, Wednesday’s attack was the 63rd in this year’s series. The number of people killed so far during Obama’s term is estimated at more than 1,500. Reports of “high-value” targets being killed are rare.

Use of unmanned drone attacks in Pakistan fall under the exclusive control of the CIA. According to U.S. media reports, the CIA has the freedom to pick whichever targets it desires. The criteria under which attacks take place are not made public. That includes, for example, how many noncombatant victims are considered acceptable in planning them.

The Wall Street Journal, closely allied with Republicans and neoconservatives, reported in unusual detail in its Nov. 4 edition that the rules of engagement for unmanned drones had been recently changed, but the report was based solely on anonymous sources. The reported changes are said to concern only the political framework of the attacks, but does not deal with their conditions as such. Supposedly, the “Pakistani leader” — a term that wasn’t precisely defined — is now to be informed of planned attacks. That was the rule in the George W. Bush era, which he later reversed. And, according to the Wall Street Journal, no attacks are to take place when Pakistani politicians are visiting the United States. The State Department and the ambassador in Islamabad are also to be included in decisions as to the timing of future attacks.

Input from those American politicians and military leaders who object to so-called “signature strikes” was ignored. In contrast to the second category — personality strikes in which specific “high value” persons are targeted — signature strikes randomly target larger groups of anonymous men and male youths among whom CIA personnel suspect there may be insurgents or supporters of the insurgency. In any case, victims in these cases are predominantly just foot soldiers. Critics in the administration and the Pentagon oppose these operations on the grounds that they are militarily ineffective and politically extremely counterproductive.