Obama's drone war kills 'others,' not just al Qaida leaders

Obama's drone war kills 'others,' not just al Qaida leaders

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/04/09/188062/obamas-drone-war-kills-others.html

 

 

Pakistani soldiers stand guard at the Shamsi Airbase located some 320

kilometers southwest of Quetta in southwest Pakistan, on December 11, 2011.

| Yslb Pak Zhang Qi/Xinhua/MCT

 

By Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Newspapers

 

WASHINGTON - Contrary to assurances it has deployed U.S. drones only against

known senior leaders of al Qaida and allied groups, the Obama administration

has targeted and killed hundreds of suspected lower-level Afghan, Pakistani

and unidentified "other" militants in scores of strikes in Pakistan's rugged

tribal area, classified U.S. intelligence reports show.

 

The administration has said that strikes by the CIA's missile-firing

Predator and Reaper drones are authorized only against "specific senior

operational leaders of al Qaida and associated forces" involved in the Sept.

11, 2001, terror attacks who are plotting "imminent" violent attacks on

Americans.

 

"It has to be a threat that is serious and not speculative," President

Barack Obama said in a Sept. 6, 2012, interview with CNN. "It has to be a

situation in which we can't capture the individual before they move forward

on some sort of operational plot against the United States."

 

Copies of the top-secret U.S. intelligence reports reviewed by McClatchy,

however, show that drone strikes in Pakistan over a four-year period didn't

adhere to those standards.

 

The intelligence reports list killings of alleged Afghan insurgents whose

organization wasn't on the U.S. list of terrorist groups at the time of the

9/11 strikes; of suspected members of a Pakistani extremist group that

didn't exist at the time of 9/11; and of unidentified individuals described

as "other militants" and "foreign fighters."

 

In a response to questions from McClatchy, the White House defended its

targeting policies, pointing to previous public statements by senior

administration officials that the missile strikes are aimed at al Qaida and

associated forces.

 

Micah Zenko, an expert with the Council on Foreign Relations, a bipartisan

foreign policy think tank, who closely follows the target killing program,

said McClatchy's findings indicate that the administration is "misleading

the public about the scope of who can legitimately be targeted."

 

The documents also show that drone operators weren't always certain who they

were killing despite the administration's guarantees of the accuracy of the

CIA's targeting intelligence and its assertions that civilian casualties

have been "exceedingly rare."

 

McClatchy's review is the first independent evaluation of internal U.S.

intelligence accounting of drone attacks since the Bush administration

launched America's secret aerial warfare on Oct. 7, 2001, the day a

missile-carrying Predator took off for Afghanistan from an airfield in

Pakistan on the first operational flight of an armed U.S. drone.

 

The analysis takes on additional significance because of the domestic and

international debate over the legality of drone strikes in Pakistan amid

reports that the administration is planning to broaden its use of targeted

killings in Afghanistan and North Africa.

 

The U.S. intelligence reports reviewed by McClatchy covered most - although

not all - of the drone strikes in 2006-2008 and 2010-2011. In that later

period, Obama oversaw a surge in drone operations against suspected Islamist

sanctuaries on Pakistan's side of the border that coincided with his buildup

of 33,000 additional U.S. troops in southern Afghanistan. Several documents

listed casualty estimates as well as the identities of targeted groups.

 

McClatchy's review found that:

 

- At least 265 of up to 482 people who the U.S. intelligence reports

estimated the CIA killed during a 12-month period ending in September 2011

were not senior al Qaida leaders but instead were "assessed" as Afghan,

Pakistani and unknown extremists. Drones killed only six top al Qaida

leaders in those months, according to news media accounts.

 

Forty-three of 95 drone strikes reviewed for that period hit groups other

than al Qaida, including the Haqqani network, several Pakistani Taliban

factions and the unidentified individuals described only as "foreign

fighters" and "other militants."

 

During the same period, the reports estimated there was a single civilian

casualty, an individual killed in an April 22, 2011, strike in North

Waziristan, the main sanctuary for militant groups in Pakistan's tribal

areas.

 

- At other times, the CIA killed people who only were suspected, associated

with, or who probably belonged to militant groups.

 

To date, the Obama administration has not disclosed the secret legal

opinions and the detailed procedures buttressing drone killings, and it has

never acknowledged the use of so-called "signature strikes," in which

unidentified individuals are killed after surveillance shows behavior the

U.S. government associates with terrorists, such as visiting compounds

linked to al Qaida leaders or carrying weapons. Nor has it disclosed an

explicit list of al Qaida's "associated forces" beyond the Afghan Taliban.

 

The little that is known about the opinions comes from a leaked Justice

Department white paper, a half-dozen or so speeches, some public comments by

Obama and several top lieutenants, and limited open testimony before

Congress.

 

"The United States has gone far beyond what the U.S. public - and perhaps

even Congress - understands the government has been doing and claiming they

have a legal right to do," said Mary Ellen O'Connell, a Notre Dame Law

School professor who contends that CIA drone operations in Pakistan violate

international law.

 

The documents McClatchy has reviewed do not reflect the entirety of the

killings associated with U.S. drone attacks in Pakistan, which independent

reports estimate at between 1,990 and 3,581.

 

But the classified reports provide a view into how drone strikes were

carried out during the most intense periods of drone warfare in Pakistan's

remote tribal area bordering Afghanistan. Specifically, the documents reveal

estimates of deaths and injuries; locations of militant bases and compounds;

the identities of some of those targeted or killed; the movements of targets

from village to village or compound to compound; and, to a limited degree,

the rationale for unleashing missiles.

 

The documents also reveal a breadth of targeting that is complicated by the

culture in the restive region of Pakistan where militants and ordinary

tribesmen dress the same, and carrying a weapon is part of the centuries-old

tradition of the Pashtun ethnic group.

 

The Haqqani network, for example, cooperates closely with al Qaida for

philosophical and tactical reasons, and it is blamed for some of the

bloodiest attacks against civilians and U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan. But

the Haqqani network wasn't on the U.S. list of international terrorist

groups at the time of the strikes covered by the U.S. intelligence reports,

and it isn't known to ever have been directly implicated in a plot against

the U.S. homeland.

 

Other groups the documents said were targeted have parochial objectives: the

Pakistani Taliban seeks to topple the Islamabad government; Lashkar i

Jhangvi, or Army of Jhangvi, are outlawed Sunni Muslim terrorists who've

slaughtered scores of Pakistan's minority Shiites and were blamed for a

series of attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan, including a 2006 bombing

against the U.S. consulate in Karachi that killed a U.S. diplomat. Both

groups are close to al Qaida, but neither is known to have initiated attacks

on the U.S. homeland.

 

"I have never seen nor am I aware of any rules of engagement that have been

made public that govern the conduct of drone operations in Pakistan, or the

identification of individuals and groups other than al Qaida and the Afghan

Taliban," said Christopher Swift, a national security law expert who teaches

national security affairs at Georgetown University and closely follows the

targeted killing issue. "We are doing this on a case-by-case, ad hoc basis,

rather than a systematic or strategic basis."

 

The administration has declined to reveal other details of the program, such

as the intelligence used to select targets and how much evidence is required

for an individual to be placed on a CIA "kill list." The administration also

hasn't even acknowledged the existence of so-called signature strikes, let

alone discussed the legal and procedural foundations of the attacks.

 

Leaders of the Senate and House intelligence committees say they maintain

robust oversight over the program. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman

Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., disclosed in a Feb. 13 statement that the panel

is notified "with key details . . . shortly after" every drone strike. It

also reviews videos of strikes and considers "their effectiveness as a

counterterrorism tool, verifying the care taken to avoid deaths to

non-combatants and understanding the intelligence collection and analysis

that underpins these operations."

 

But until last month, Obama had rebuffed lawmakers' repeated requests to see

all of the classified Justice Department legal opinions on the program,

giving them access to only two dealing with the president's powers to order

targeted killings. It then allowed the Senate committee access to all

opinions pertaining to the killing of U.S. citizens to clear the way for the

panel's March 7 confirmation of John Brennan, the former White House

counterterrorism chief and the key architect of the targeted killings

program, as the new CIA director. But it continues to deny access to other

opinions on the grounds that they are privileged legal advice to the

president.

 

Moreover, most of the debate in the United States has focused on the deaths

of four Americans - all killed in drone strikes in Yemen, but only one

intentionally targeted - and not the thousands of others who've been killed,

the majority of whom have been hit in Pakistan.

 

Obama and his top aides say the United States is in an "armed conflict" with

al Qaida and the Afghan Taliban, and the targeted killing program complies

with U.S. and international laws, including an "inherent" right to

self-defense and the international laws of war. Obama also derives his

authority to order targeted killings from the Constitution and a Sept. 14,

2001, congressional resolution empowering the president to use "all

necessary and appropriate force" against those who perpetrated 9/11 and

those who aided them, they say.

 

Time and again, the administration has defined the drone targets as

operational leaders of al Qaida, the Afghan Taliban and associated groups

plotting imminent attacks on the American homeland. Occasionally, however,

officials have made oblique references to undefined associated forces and

threats against unidentified Americans and U.S. facilities.

 

On April 30, 2012, Brennan gave the most detailed explanation of Obama's

drone program. He referred to al Qaida 73 times, the Afghan Taliban three

times and mentioned no other group by name.

 

"We only authorize a particular operation against a specific individual if

we have a high degree of confidence that the individual being targeted is

indeed the terrorist we are pursuing," Brennan said.

 

To be sure, America's drone program has killed militants without risk to the

nation's armed forces.

 

The administration argues that drones - in Brennan's words - are a "wise

choice" for fighting terrorists. Over the years, the aircraft have battered

al Qaida's Pakistan-based core leadership and crippled its ability to stage

complex attacks. And officials note it has been done without sending U.S.

troops into hostile territory or causing civilian casualties "except in the

rarest of circumstances."

 

"Any actions we take fully comport to our law and meet the standards that I

think . . . the American people expect of us as far as taking actions we

need to protect the American people, but at the same time ensuring that we

do everything possible before we need to resort to lethal force," Brennan

said at his Feb. 7 Senate Intelligence Committee confirmation hearing.

 

Caitlin Hayden, national security spokeswoman for the White House, said late

Tuesday that the Brennan speech is broad enough to cover strikes against

others who are not al Qaida or the Afghan Taliban. While she did not cite

any authority for broader targeting, Hayden said: "You should not assume he

is only talking about al Qaida just because he doesn't say 'al Qaida, the

Taliban, and associated forces' at every reference."

 

Some legal scholars and human rights organizations, however, dispute the

program's legality.

 

Obama, they think, is misinterpreting international law, including the laws

of war, which they say apply only to the uniformed military, not the

civilian CIA, and to traditional battlefields like those in Afghanistan, not

to Pakistan's tribal area, even though it may be a sanctuary for al Qaida

and other violent groups. They argue that Obama also is strengthening his

executive powers with an excessively broad application of the September 2001

use-of-force resolution.

 

The administration's definition of "imminent threat" also is in dispute. The

Justice Department's leaked white paper argues the United States should be

able "to act in self-defense in circumstances where there is evidence of

further imminent attacks by terrorist groups even if there is no specific

evidence of where such an attack will take place or of the precise nature of

the attack." Legal scholars counter that the administration is using an

exaggerated definition of imminence that doesn't exist in international law.

 

"I'm thankful that my doctors don't use their (the administration's)

definition of imminence when looking at imminent death. A head cold could be

enough to pull the plug on you," said Morris Davis, a Howard University Law

School professor and former Air Force lawyer who served as chief prosecutor

of the Guantanamo Bay terrorism trials.

 

Since 2004, drone program critics say, the strikes have killed hundreds of

civilians, fueling anti-U.S. outrage, boosting extremist recruiting, and

helping to destabilize Pakistan's U.S.-backed government. And some experts

warn that the United States may be setting a new standard of international

conduct that other countries will grasp to justify their own targeted

killings and to evade accountability.

 

Other governments "won't just emulate U.S. practice but (will adopt)

America's justification for targeted killings," said Zenko of the Council on

Foreign Relations. "When there is such a disconnect between who the

administration says it kills and who it (actually) kills, that hypocrisy

itself is a very dangerous precedent that other countries will emulate."

 

A special U.N. human rights panel began a nine-month investigation in

January into whether drone strikes, including the CIA operations in

Pakistan, violate international law by causing disproportionate numbers of

civilian casualties. The panel's head, British lawyer Ben Emmerson, declared

after a March 11-13 visit to Pakistan that the U.S. drone campaign "involves

the use of force on the territory of another state without its consent and

is therefore a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty."

 

The administration asserts that drones are used to hit specific individuals

only after their names are added to a "list of active terrorists," following

a process of "extraordinary care and thoughtfulness" that confirms their

identities as members of al Qaida or "associated forces" and weighs the

strategic value of killing each one.

 

Yet the U.S. intelligence reports show that 43 out of the 95 strikes

recorded in reports for the year ending in September 2011 were launched

against groups other than al Qaida. Prominent among them were the Haqqani

network and the Taliban Movement of Pakistan.

 

The Haqqani network is an Afghan Taliban-allied organization that operates

in eastern Afghanistan and whose leaders are based in Pakistan's adjacent

North Waziristan tribal agency. The United States accuses the group of

staging some of the deadliest terrorist attacks in Kabul, including on the

Indian and U.S. embassies, killing civilians, and attacking U.S.-led forces

in Afghanistan. But the Obama administration didn't officially designate the

network as a terrorist group until September 2012.

 

Its titular head is Jalaluddin Haqqani, an aging former anti-Soviet

guerrilla who served as a minor minister and top military commander in the

Taliban regime that sheltered al Qaida until both were driven into Pakistan

by the 2001 U.S. intervention in Afghanistan. U.S. officials allege that the

group, whose operational chief is Haqqani's son, Sirajuddin, closely works

with al Qaida and is backed by elements of the Pakistani army-led

Inter-Services Intelligence spy service, a charge denied by Islamabad.

 

At least 15 drone strikes were launched against the Haqqani network or

locations where its fighters were present during the one-year period ending

in September 2011, according to the U.S. intelligence reports. They

estimated that up to 96 people - or about 20 percent of the total for that

period - were killed.

 

One report also makes clear that during the Bush administration, the agency

killed Haqqani family women and children.

 

According to the report, an undisclosed number of Haqqani subcommanders,

unnamed Arabs and unnamed "members of the extended Haqqani family" died in a

Sept. 8, 2008, strike. News reports on the attack in the North Waziristan

village of Dandey Darapakhel said that among as many as 25 dead were an Arab

who was chief of al Qaida's operations in Pakistan, and eight of Jalaluddin

Haqqani's grandchildren, one of his wives, two nieces and a sister.

 

The U.S. intelligence reports estimated that as many as 31 people were

killed in at least nine strikes on the Pakistani Taliban or on locations

that the group shared with others between January 2010 and September 2011.

While U.S. officials say the Taliban Movement of Pakistan works closely with

al Qaida, its goal is to topple the Pakistani government through suicide

bombings, assaults and assassinations, not attacking the United States. The

group wasn't founded until 2007, and some of the strikes in the U.S.

intelligence reports occurred before the administration designated it a

terrorist organization in September 2010.

 

The U.S. intelligence reports estimated that the CIA killed scores of other

individuals in 2010 and 2011 in strikes on other non-al Qaida groups

categorized as suspected extremists and unidentified "foreign fighters," or

"other militants." Some died in what appeared to be signature strikes, their

vehicles blown to pieces sometimes only a few days after being monitored

visiting the sites of earlier drone attacks, or driving between compounds

linked to al Qaida or other groups.

 

"The first challenge in any war is knowing who you're fighting, and

distinguishing those that pose a credible threat to your interests and

security," said Swift.

 

The U.S. intelligence documents also describe a lack of precision when it

comes to identifying targets.

 

Consider one attack on Feb. 18, 2010.

 

Information, according to one U.S. intelligence account, indicated that

Badruddin Haqqani, the then-No. 2 leader of the Haqqani network, would be at

a relative's funeral that day in North Waziristan. Watching the video feed

from a drone high above the mourners, CIA operators in the United States

identified a man they believed could be Badruddin Haqqani from the deference

and numerous greetings he received. The man also supervised a private family

viewing of the body.

 

Yet despite a targeting process that the administration says meets "the

highest possible standards," it wasn't Badruddin Haqqani who died when one

of the drone's missiles ripped apart the target's car after he'd left the

funeral.

 

It was his younger brother, Mohammad.

 

Friends later told reporters that Mohammad Haqqani was a religious student

in his 20s uninvolved in terrorism; the U.S. intelligence report called him

an active member - but not a leader - of the Haqqani network. At least one

other unidentified occupant of his vehicle perished, according to the

report.

 

It took the CIA another 18 months to find and kill Badruddin Haqqani.

 

Read more here:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/04/09/188062/obamas-drone-war-kills-others.h

tml#storylink=cpy

 

==========================================

(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this

message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to

these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed

within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with

"Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.

The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The

Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain

permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials

if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,

teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria

for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies

as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four

criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is

determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not

substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use

copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you

must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

 

THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS

PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.