Tag: Democracy and Rule of Law
Odd duck
I livetweeted Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan’s appearance in Washington at SETA (a Turkish thinktank for political, economic social research) yesterday, but the performance merited more. Maybe my numerous Turkish readers will find it interesting, even if the Americans don’t. I rarely attend such high-level public events, as little new gets said.
But Erdogan did not disappoint. Speaking in Turkish (I was listening to the simultaneous translation), his main theme was this:
no justice means no humanity, no dignity, and no peace.
He went on to talk about the “bottom billion” living on less than $1 per day, most of whom are innocent children, as well as the suffering in Somalia and Darfur. Personally moved by starvation and circumcision done with a simple knife on several children, he underlined the injustice of racism and discrimination, referring in particular to violence against Muslims in Myanmar.
Lack of justice in one place is a threat to justice elsewhere. Palestine is not a territorial issue but a justice issue. Israeli settlements are making a two-state solution impossible. Israel should release Palestinian prisoners and end the blockade. Hamas will have to be at the negotiating table. It was elected and then denied the right to govern. Israel has apologized for its raid on the Turkish aid flotilla. Compensation is under discussion. Then Turkey will press for an end to the occupation.
The twentieth century was one of war and injustice. The twenty-first century should be one of peace and justice. Turkish policy is based on justice and humanity. This is why Turkey supported the people in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, and Syria. But the UN Security Council is doing nothing. The system is blocked, and wrong. Humanity cannot be in the hands of one or two countries; the system has to be changed. Events like those of the 1990s in Bosnia and Rwanda are happening again, but the Security Council is doing nothing.
A world in which babies are slaughtered is not a religious world. This is not honorable and it makes me mad. When you witness things of this sort, you have a responsibility. Why is the media not covering the slaughter in Banias (Syria)? The babies dying are not only their parents, but also ours. You have to act. You have to stop these things. Society shares responsibility for this evil. There is a need for global conscience and justice. We have to see that the elements bringing us together are stronger than those that drive us apart. We have to help the poor and the weak. We cannot step on each other and remain connected to our ideals and faith.
Somewhere around this point, Erdogan took a diversion that I wasn’t able to capture tweeting but I’ll try to reproduce here. God’s justice, he said, is ever present but manifests itself at different times and places. He reminded the audience of the Koranic phrase
Bismillah al rahman al rahim
This is generally translated
In the name of God, most Gracious, most Compassionate
But, Erdogan said, its real meaning is that God has two aspects. The first he shows to everyone on earth during their lifetimes. This is the same for everyone (most Gracious). The second is reserved for the faithful in the afterlife (most Compassionate). I’m no theologian, but this struck me as a millenarian concept rather similar to that of the raptured Christians or the Puritans’ “elect.” No ecumenism in this second aspect. Only true believers enter heaven.
I imagine some aide in the front row was figuratively urging him to move on at this point, which is what he did. Turkey will fulfill its obligations, Erdogan said. We want to see more countries concerned about Syria, where the regime does not control much of the territory but uses its weapons to fire on the population. Asad has fired hundreds of missiles and used sarin gas.
President Obama is trying to do the right thing, but what is needed is UN Security Council action, which would accelerate the process. Russia needs to step forward. Turkey will continue to cooperate with Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
In the Q and A, Erdogan said he would go soon to Gaza and the West Bank (he did not mention Israel). He is against war, but sometimes justice requires it. The clergy should help us avoid getting to that point by reaching across borders. An EU/US trade agreement is a fine idea, but it will need to take into account Turkey’s interests, as Turkey has a customs union with the EU. Turkey will continue to press China on respecting the rights of the Uighurs.
The session ended without questions about Kurds inside Turkey, imprisonment of journalists or other human rights violations. As questions were submitted in writing, the moderator presumably tossed those.
This is an odd duck: a religious and social conservative who has instituted vigorous free market economic reforms but also holds liberal internationalist views on the world, while ignoring those views when it comes to internal politics and human rights.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Ten things the president should be doing
Herewith my short list of ten international issues more worthy of presidential attention than the issues that are getting it this week:
- Drones: Apparently the President is preparing to address how and why he uses them soon.
- Syria: Secretary of State Kerry and the Russians are ginning up a peace conference next month, while Moscow strengthens Syrian defenses against Western intervention.
- Iraq: The Syrian war is spilling over and posing serious challenges to the country’s political cohesion.
- Egypt: President Morsi is taking the Arab world’s most populous country in economically and politically ruinous directions.
- Israel/Palestine: With the peace process moribund, the window is closing on the opportunity to reach a two-state outcome.
- Libya: The failure to establish the state’s monopoly on the legitimate use of force leaves open the possibility of further attacks on Americans (and on the Libyan state).
- Afghanistan: The American withdrawal is on schedule, but big questions remain about what will be left behind.
- Pakistan: Nawaz Sharif’s hat trick provides an opportunity for improved relations, if managed well.
- Iran: once its presidential election is over (first round is June 14, runoff if needed June 21), a last diplomatic effort on its nuclear ambitions will begin.
- All that Asia stuff: North Korean nukes, maritime jostling with China, Trans-Pacific Partnership, transition in Myanmar (how about trying for one in Vietnam?), Japan’s economic and military revival…
In the good old days, presidents in domestic trouble headed out on international trips. Obama doesn’t seem inclined in that direction. He really does want to limit America’s commitments abroad and restore its economy at home. Bless him. But if things get much worse, I’ll bet on a road trip.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Guatemala leads, will anyone follow?
The genocide conviction of general and coup leader Efraín Ríos Montt for his scorched earth campaign against the Ixil Mayans is remarkable in the Guatemalan context. More than 30 years after his cruel campaign of extermination, which murdered 5.5% of their population, a Guatemalan court sentenced the 86-year-old dictator to 80 years in prison and ordered the Guatemalan government to make “fair restitution” by asking the Ixil Mayans for forgiveness and making available public funds. It’s not over. Ríos Montt is expected to appeal.
The conviction is also remarkable in the international context. This is the first time a head of state (de facto, not de jure) has been convicted of genocide in his own country.
But what effect will this have? Is Adama Dieng, the UN special adviser on the prevention of genocide, justified in hoping this case sets an example to countries “that have failed to hold accountable those individuals responsible for serious and massive human rights violations.”
I doubt it. I might hope that President Omar al Bashir of Sudan will be tried one day in a Sudanese court, but it seems highly unlikely. I might hope even more that President Bashar al Asad of Syria be tried in Damascus, but the odds aren’t good for that either. I doubt one-tenth of those tried and convicted in The Hague at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia over the past 20 years would have been tried in their home countries, and possibly many fewer.
The more interesting question is how chiefs of state will behave in response to the Guatemalan decision. Will they constrain their genocidal instincts? Will they be more careful about claiming to control their troops? Will their lieutenants refuse to carry out orders? Will they outsource murder to paramilitaries? There are many ways of evading what happened to Ríos Montt, who left not only lots of documentation but even video of himself claiming to have complete command of the Guatemalan military.
Ríos Montt was popular in Washington with President Reagan. He was, after all, supposedly fighting Communists, which in the Central America of the 1980s could get you a blank check to do just about anything you wanted. Things have changed, but of course American support for leaders who torture and kill alleged Al Qaeda enemies is still with us. It isn’t genocide, but it isn’t pretty either. A good deal of effort goes into making sure we don’t get the full picture, including about our own government’s misdeeds.
This brings me to where I started: the Guatemalans have done themselves proud. But whether they have set a good precedent, or discouraged others from misbehavior, will be determined by what brave people in other countries, including our own, do to follow the Guatemalan lead. I’m not confident others can match their lead.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Islamists in the political vortex
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace launched its most recent report this week with a panel on Islam and Politics in the New Egypt. Author Nathan Brown focused primarily on the long term outlook for religion and politics in Egypt, purposefully avoiding entanglement in the day-to-day political chaos of Egypt. Jocelyne Cesari of Harvard University and Jonathon Brown of Georgetown joined him in analyzing the motivations and interactions of the three major Islamic forces in Egypt: the Muslims Brotherhood, the Salafis and al-Azhar University.
The current power holder, the Muslim Brotherhood, defines itself as a reform movement, built on an Islamic foundation. Before the 2011 revolution the Brotherhood saw itself as representing a silent majority with only distant aspirations to govern. Their rise to power was so rapid that their political calculations have been reduced to day-to-day reactions with no time for long-term reflection. Cesari commented that the Brotherhood has been successful at the new political game, but that does not mean that it actually has the capacity to govern. One of its biggest blunders was to pose as winners after the election. This behavior polarized the opposition, thwarted dialogue and stunted the pluralism necessary for democracy.
The Salafi movement has also enjoyed substantial electoral success. It claims to stand for religious truth and proper practice of Islam in Egypt and internationally. But like the Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafis have to think politically for the first time: ‘what does it mean to be a political party?’ and ‘how should we vote and what should we ally ourselves with?’ The political competition has been much more intense than the Salafis anticipated. This has led to recruitment of much needed political experts, who do not necessarily identify with Salafism. Adjusting to competitive politics, the Salafis are going to have to endure an unprecedented amount of criticism and even ridicule in Egypt’s post-revolutionary, relatively open society.
Al-Azhar, Egypt’s center of Sunni learning, has always striven to understand and interpret Islam in a scholarly way. The institution has never been fundamentally political, but sees itself as a moral voice of Islamic interpretation caught up in political games. The university wants to emerge as the central voice in all religious political debates. Both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafi movement latch onto al-Azhar as a source of Muslim understanding and national pride. This gives al-Azhar the opportunity to mediate. Al-Azhar’s centrality is critical right now, but in the long term it could become a political football once other parties become more polarized. Nathan Brown writes in the introduction of his report “al-Azhar in particular may find that every step towards increased centrality moves it further away from autonomy.”
None of these three entities were ever entirely about politics, but the revolution sucked each into the vortex of governing and power. They were given an unprecedented opportunity to achieve a more valuable place in Egyptian society. If they allow themselves to be too tempted by power, then they are going to have to face the consequences down the road. Jonathan Brown thought the ideological leanings of each group not entirely distinct and decreasingly important. Increasingly, international funding has turned internal Egyptian politics into a contest among various Gulf states, which have aligned either with the Brotherhood or the Salafists.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks, May 6th-May 10th
Lots of Egypt, Pakistan and other interesting events in DC this week:
1. Where is the Cultural Revolution in Egypt Headed? Monday, May 6 / 12:00pm – 1:00pm , Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20004
Speakers: Margot Badran
Drawing on her experience and observations in Egypt over the past two and a half years since the outbreak of the revolution, Badran will look at changes in the everyday lives of Egyptians. She will focus on gender ideas and practices as part of the process of cultural and religious transformation underway and place this in the shifting political contexts.
Register for the event here:
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/where-the-cultural-revolution-egypt-headed
2. Egypt in Transition, Monday, May 6 / 12:15pm – 1:45pm, New America Foundation
Venue: New America Foundation, 1899 L St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20036
Speakers: Ahmed Maher, Jawad Nabulsi, Leila Hilal, Peter Bergen
As Egypt’s revolutionary process derails, a myriad of political actors are struggling to form a new consensus about how to resolve the current political crisis and start rebuilding the state. The country’s uprising gave birth to a new generation of leaders that are working to seize this transformative moment to redefine their country.
Please join New America’s Middle East Task Force for a conversation with two prominent members of Egypt’s civil society. We will discuss the turmoil facing Egypt, the upcoming legislative elections, next steps for the ‘youth of Tahrir,’ and Egypt’s future trajectory.
Register for the event here:
http://www.newamerica.net/events/2013/egypt_in_transition
3. Amidst Iraq’s Turmoil: What Can We Do?/ Monday, May 6 / 2:00pm – 3:30pm, US Institute of Peace
Venue: US Institute of Peace, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, D.C.
Speakers: James Jeffrey, Dan Serwer, Mike Pillinger, Sarhang Hamasaeed, Manal Omar
For well over a year, Iraq’s political, security, economic, and social well-being continues to be shaken by internal and external events that have implications for stability in the country and the region. Despite gains, recent events on the ground have taken a swift turn. Internal displacement, the rise of armed groups, and recourse to violence present serious challenges in maintaining peace and sustained development within the country. As international attention has shifted to Syria and North Africa, the hurdles that Iraq faces internally need to be considered in light of these regional circumstances. Cross-border migration, a large number of returnees, and a growing influx of Syrian refugees too have a destabilizing force in Iraq.
How are Iraqis coping with the current crisis, and how can they be better engaged by the international community? What policy levers do the U.S. or other international actors have to help promote stability? What lessons can be applied across the increasingly porous and insecure boundaries of the Middle East?
The International Organization for Migration and the U.S. Institute of Peace invite you to a panel discussion on these urgent issues on May 6th from 2:00pm to 3:30pm.
Register for the event here:
http://www.usip.org/events/amidst-iraq-s-turmoil-what-can-we-do
4. The Drone Next Door, Tuesday, May 7 / 9:00am – 1:45pm, New America Foundation
Venue: New America Foundation, 1899 L St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20036
Speakers: Will Saletan, Paul Gosar, Rosa Brooks, Missy Cummings, Michael Toscano, Shane Harris and more
Drones have become essential to the American way of war. They’ve given the military nearly constant surveillance from the sky, and allow for quick attacks from afar. And now, like countless other technologies forged in the heat of battle, drones are making their way to the home front, pressed into civilian service. Call them drones, unmanned aerial vehicles, or remote-control planes; these high-tech devices have appealed to Border Patrol and local law enforcement, but also to conservationists, journalists, hobbyists, and more. How do we decide who gets to have their own set of eyes in the skies? What does it mean for your privacy and safety if your neighbors get their own drone?
Register here:
http://www.newamerica.net/events/2013/the_drone_next_door
5. Pakistan’s General Elections 2013: Stakes and Prospects, Tuesday, May 7 / 12:00pm – 1:30pm, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
Speakers: Simbal Khan, Daniel Markey, Malik Akbar, Steve Inskeep
On May 11, 2013, for the first time in Pakistan’s history, the country will hold general elections after a legislature has completed its term. While much attention has been paid to security’s effects on the elections, other key factors, such as demography, will also influence the outcome. Of Pakistan’s 90 million voters, 40 million will be voting for the first time. This makes the election seem more open than ever. Simbal Khan, Malik Siraj Akbar, and Daniel Markey will discuss the key factors the stakes and prospects for Pakistan’s elections. Steve Inskeep, host of NPR’s Morning Edition, will moderate.
Register here:
http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/05/07/pakistan-s-general-elections-2013-stakes-and-prospects/g1os
6. The International Response to Syria’s Humanitarian Catastrophe, Tuesday, May 7 / 12:15pm – 1:15pm, Middle East Institute
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036, Choate Room
Speaker: Valerie Amos
The Middle East Institute is pleased to welcome Valerie Amos, the UN under-secretary-general for Humanitarian Affairs, for a discussion about the humanitarian crisis inside Syria. Now in its second year, the Syrian conflict has generated more than 1.3 million refugees and left 4.25 million internally displaced. According to the UN, some 6.8 million people are in desperate need of assistance. And yet security limitations on the ground in Syria have made the delivery of emergency relief extremely challenging. Amos will lay out the current conditions inside Syria as well as put forward suggestions for what more the international community can be doing to alleviate the crisis.
http://www.mei.edu/events/international-response-syrias-humanitarian-catastrophe
7. Religion and Politics in Revolutionary Egypt, Wednesday, May 8 / 9:00am – 10:30am, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
Speakers: Nathan J. Brown, Jonathan Brown, Jocelyne Cesari
In the wake of Egypt’s revolution, a sea change is undeniably under way: Islam is playing a different and more powerful role in Egyptian public life. But focusing on the growing influence of Islamic forces masks an unpredictable evolution proceeding underneath the surface. The Muslim Brotherhood, Salafis, and a host of state institutions dedicated to Islam are themselves being reshaped by their growing involvement in politics, often in ways that are difficult to predict and even more difficult for their leaders to control. Join us for a discussion at the Carnegie Endowment where Nonresident Senior Associate Nathan J. Brown will present his new paper Islam and Politics in the New Egypt. Jocelyn Cesari of Harvard University and Jonathan A. C. Brown of Georgetown University will offer their comments.
Register for the event here:
http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/05/08/religion-and-politics-in-revolutionary-egypt/g0n8
8. Case Study: Regulating the Private Health Sector in Afghanistan, Wednesday, May 8 / 12:00pm – 1:00pm, O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law
Venue: Georgetown University Law Center, 111 G Street, NW ∙ Washington, DC 20001, E.B. Williams Library, Room 358
Speakers: Michele Forzley
Afghanistan is transitioning from a system in which government provides services to one in which government is the regulator of a changing public health care system and a new emerging private health sector. In the years since the Taliban era ended, the Government of Afghanistan has taken many steps to encourage the development of a market economy and in 2012 its Cabinet passed a law to regulate the private health sector. This law empowered and directed the Ministry of Public Health, (MoPH) to undertake the regulatory functions of licensing, setting standards, monitoring, evaluating performance of private health actors and enforcing the law with sanctions. To implement this new law, many of the departments of the MoPH will have to develop new procedures and forms and undertake additional or new regulatory functions. In accordance with the current national health policy objective of good governance, these new procedures and functions must reflect good governance and rule of law principles. Since last year, Professor Forzley has been working as a consultant and legal advisor to assist the Afghanistan MoPH to implement the new law in accordance with rule of law and good governance principles. Her presentation will cover a background on Afghanistan, its health system and the new private sector, the main functions of the new law, how procedures and systems are being developed to reflect good governance principle and future planned work.
More info here:
Click to access May8_MicheleForzleyBrownBag.pdf
9. Auditing Afghanistan, Wednesday, May 8 / 12:15pm – 1:45pm, New America Foundation
Venue: New America Foundation, 1899 L St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20036
Speakers: John F. Sopko, Peter Bergen
The United States has spent tens of billions of dollars on the reconstruction effort in Afghanistan, and making sure that money goes where it is supposed to go has been one of the toughest jobs of the conflict. As America transitions control of security operations and other governance processes to the Afghans, this job will become even harder.
The New America Foundation’s National Security Studies Program is pleased to welcome the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) John F. Sopko on May 8 for a discussion on Afghanistan’s upcoming transition, and some of the most worrying trends he sees in the way U.S. taxpayer dollars are used in the country.
Register here:
http://www.newamerica.net/events/2013/auditing_afghanistan
10. The Future of American-Iraqi Relations, Wednesday, May 8 / 7:00pm, Al-Hewar Center
Venue: Vienna Community Center, 120 Cherry Street, S.E., Vienna, VA
Speakers: Phebe Marr
A conversation with Dr. Phebe Marr, a prominent American historian of modern Iraq with the Middle East Institute, about “The Future of American-Iraqi Relations.”
Dr. Marr has been research professor at the National Defense University and is a retired professor of history at University of Tennessee and Stanislaus State University in California.
More info here:
http://www.alhewar.com/newevents.html
11. Human Rights in Tunisia’s Transition: A View from the Field, Thursday, May 9 / 10:00am – 11:30am, Project on Middle East Democracy
Venue: US Institute of Peace, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, D.C.
Speakers: Amel Azzouz, Amna Guellali, Daniel Brumberg, Stephen McInerney, Joyce Kasee
Between 2012-2013, Tunisia’s political scene has witnessed increasing polarization and occasional violence, culminating in the assassination of Chokri Belaid in February 2013. In this context, Tunisia’s National Constituent Assembly is considering the third and perhaps final draft of its proposed constitution. The constitution-writing process has been protracted by disagreements about allusions to Islam and cultural values, and the primacy of human rights as they are internationally defined.
As Tunisia is led by a provisional government, how does the country rank on human rights, addressing political violence by intolerant groups, protecting freedom of expression and the rights of women and minorities, and writing a constitution that safeguards the rights of all Tunisians?
Register here:
http://www.usip.org/events/human-rights-in-tunisia-s-transition-view-the-field
12. Governance Opportunities and Challenges for the Incoming Pakistani Administration, Thursday, May 9 / 2:00pm – 3:30pm , Atlantic Council
Venue: Atlantic Council of the United States, 1101 15th Street, NW, 11th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005
Speakers: Alex Thier
Please join the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center for “Governance Opportunities and Challenges for the Incoming Pakistani Administration,” a conversation with Alex Thier, assistant to the administrator, Office of Afghanistan and Pakistan Affairs, US Agency for International Development.
Pakistan’s General Election is set for May 11 and regardless of which party comes to power, the next administration will face a number of daunting challenges related to successful governance. High unemployment, circular debt in Pakistan’s energy sector, and widespread corruption only hit the tip of the iceberg when it comes to severe challenges that Pakistan is facing. The election results could also bring a shift in the central government’s relationship not only with the provinces but also with the people. Despite this, every challenge also presents an opportunity for Pakistan.
USAID’s program in Pakistan has been working on transforming a number of these challenges into opportunities, including supporting energy sector reforms, encouraging trade liberalization, and increasing political parties’ responsiveness to constituent concerns. USAID’s Alex Thier will speak to these efforts and offer his insight on how Pakistan, amongst all its transitions, can make the governance choices that will accelerate a positive trajectory of economic and civic growth.
RSVP to:
southasia@acus.org
13. Egypt’s Revolution, Two Years On: Transition in Distress?, Thursday, May 9 / 2:30pm, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Venue: 1150 22nd St NW Washington, DC 20037
Speakers: Anwar E. El Sadat and Helmy el-Gazzar
As part of the 2013 Soref Symposium, the Washington Institute will host a conversation with Anwar E. El Sadat, founder and chairman of the El Sadat Association for Social Development & Welfare and a former member of the Egyptian parliament, and Helmy el-Gazzer, from the shura committee of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.
This event is open to the press and will also be streamed live at: https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/.
14. U.S. Defense Policy in the Middle East, Thursday, May 9 / 7:00pm, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Venue: 1150 22nd St NW Washington, DC 20037
Speakers: Chuck Hagel
The keynote address of the 2013 Soref Symposium will feature remarks by U.S. defense secretary Chuck Hagel, as he discusses U.S. military and security policy in the Middle East.
This event is open to members of the media and will be streamed live at https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Game of Drones
The debate over the use of drones falls into three paradigms: legal, practical and moral. The panel hosted on Wednesday by the Bi-Partisan Policy Center (BPC) followed this pattern.
John Bellinger, a lawyer and former adviser to the Department of State, said legally, it is permissible to use Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) to kill leaders who plot against the United States. Under international law, use of force is permissible under an imminent threat or during ongoing hostilities.
Hina Shamsi of the ACLU replied that the United States does not conduct drone strikes under those guidelines. No evidence is required that a plot is taking place. During wartime, Thomas Kean, the co-chair of the BPC’s Homeland Security Project, we may suspend civil rights and take otherwise illegal actions, but the US drone program is going beyond that and conducting actions illegal even in wartime.
A crucial problem is lack of transparency. The Obama administration needs to prove that what they are doing is lawful. So far they have not succeeded. Who is making the decisions? What are the legal standards? Who are the targets and why? Restricted access to White House legal memos on the drone program inhibits Congress from constructing an adequate legal framework and from conducting oversight. Bellinger posed the question, once meant to be a controversial joke, now an impending reality: “Will drones be Obama’s Guantanamo [controversial legacy]?” Shamsi warned that transparency is necessary for a healthy democracy. The drone program threatens our democracy’s health.
Philip Zelikow, former counselor at the Department of State under George W. Bush, presented a defense and explanation of how the administration approaches the use of UAVs. The argument centers on how to conduct warfare with a group like Al Qaeda, a non-state actor, spread out over multiple nations. First, he explained, you need to define a doorway that once entered allows you to kill people. Having passed through the doorway, you ask ‘which people can I kill?’ You have to set standards. Zelikow advocated a: “rule of law” approach. The doorway should be public, debated and discussed, to ensure a healthy democracy. Who you can kill should be defined carefully as someone who directly participates in hostilities.
Bellinger pointed out that the rest of the world operates within a human rights paradigm. The drone issue heavily affects international response and regional blowback. No other nation has publicly agreed with our drone program. To others, the US appears indifferent to civilian casualties. The perception of America as ruthless undermines our legitimacy as a world power. Shamsi added that America needs to be concerned about the precedent it sets for the rest of the world. Sooner or later, other countries and non-state actors will get drone technology. “We need to consider,” she added, “if we want to live in the world that we are currently defining.”
Mark Mazzetti of the New York Times posed the question of how and why drones are used in countries where American is not at war. Is the bar different for targeted killings in Yemen or Pakistan? What does this new style of war mean for regional repercussions and blowback? Drone strikes gone awry, in these areas especially, generate fear and hatred. They also lead to increased radicalization and motivate extremism.
The time has come for a renewed debate on the use of military force, including drones. The enemies are not conventional ones. We need public discussion on what is permissible, legally, practically and morally.
RSS - Posts
