American Military Drone Strikes in Light of The Just War Theory

In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the CIA carried out a substantial amount of missile strikes on suspected terrorists using remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) as part of their targeted killing program in the United States’ war on terror. The CIA employed various disputed practices during the program, aimed at suspected terrorists in non-combat zones outside of the conventional battlefields, which tested the boundaries of the just war theory, the law of war. This research set out to address whether the CIA’s RPA’s targeted killings were justified taking the just war theory into account. It set out to achieve its goal by taking a comparative approach to the problem at hand, the carried-out RPA strikes in non-combat zones, which were allegedly authorized by the United States Congress’ Authorization For The Use of Military Force, and their relationship with the principles of the just war theory. The just war theory consists of two important principles, jus ad...Show moreIn the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the CIA carried out a substantial amount of missile strikes on suspected terrorists using remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) as part of their targeted killing program in the United States’ war on terror. The CIA employed various disputed practices during the program, aimed at suspected terrorists in non-combat zones outside of the conventional battlefields, which tested the boundaries of the just war theory, the law of war. This research set out to address whether the CIA’s RPA’s targeted killings were justified taking the just war theory into account. It set out to achieve its goal by taking a comparative approach to the problem at hand, the carried-out RPA strikes in non-combat zones, which were allegedly authorized by the United States Congress’ Authorization For The Use of Military Force, and their relationship with the principles of the just war theory. The just war theory consists of two important principles, jus ad bellum, which dictates when it is lawful to employ military action and jus in bello, which dictates how that military action should be executed. In doing so, this research has provided a historical background of the RPA and collected data on the carried-out RPA strikes in non-combat-zones, namely Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, which were the case studies for this research. This research argues that the CIA’s disputed practices such as ‘signature strikes’ which often failed to discriminate, ‘second strikes’ and ‘MIM’s’ which which were disproportionate military action, have been violations of the principles of the just war theory. Whilst the United States argued to be at war with Al-Qaida and its affiliates and their actions to be legal and in accord with the laws of war, the covert nature of the CIA’s targeted killing program made it impossible to provide a rock-solid proof of ties between the targeted suspected terrorists and the laid-out enemy in the AUMF 2001 that would justify the RPA strikes or a war on terror that would be in any case subordinate to the law of war.Show less

Leiden University Student Repository

Documents

In Collections

American Military Drone Strikes in Light of The Just War Theory