UN expert: CIA drone strikes violate international laws of war

UN human rights expert: CIA drone strikes violate laws of war
By The Associated Press Friday, May 28th, 2010

The use of drones by U.S. intelligence agencies to target suspected militants in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere lacks the accountability required under international law, a U.N. human rights expert said Friday.

Philip Alston, a New York University law professor, will call next week for new international rules to govern the use of drones to ensure they are deployed in line with the laws of war.

The CIA's program of drone strikes against suspected al-Qaida and Taliban insurgents has never been publicly acknowledged by U.S. administration officials, even though it has been written about extensively in the media.

A CIA spokesman said last month that the intelligence agency's counterterror operations are conducted in strict accord with the law.

"In my view there is no legal prohibition on CIA agents, or you and me, deciding to take a 'direct part in hostilities,' which is not to say that it is desirable," Alston told The Associated Press in an e-mail Friday.


"The problem for me is that when this happens, especially as a matter of state policy, there is no willingness to comply with any of the requirements as to transparency and accountability which are central to international humanitarian law."

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0528/human-rights-expert-cia-drone-strikes-violate-laws-war/

The implication here is that the UN would be OK with it if, for example, DoD had pilots running the strikes on CIA intel.

CIA is civilian, technically, and not protected as a class of combatants in wartime. CIA pilots could therefore legitimately face murder charges, where a soldier firing the missile would not.

This is, I'd point out, HARDLY the issue most DUers have with the Predators. But it's really the only legitimate legal qualm.

a drone is nothing more than a combat aircraft where the pilot has been relocated to a safe position. The ignorance of people on this subject is beyond measure.

Would YOU be okay with Afghani predator drones knocking off folks in NJ? Be honest.

Would you be more upset about Afghani drones killing civilians than Afghani manned aircraft?

It's telling that the person making the charges only included the use of drones in Afghanistan but not attack copters or fixed wing attack jets. It's like people are under the false impression that drones are some sort of robot going on autonomous killing sprees.

CIA is a civilian agency. Civilians shooting people isn't tolerated under rules of war, it's the notion of lawful combatants.

CIA pilots firing missiles from Predators is the problem, and it's a real one.

The CIA may provide the targets but the Air Force pilots are the one's operating the drones and all manned aircraft

Take it to the bank, we fly them out of Langley.

it seems the claim is that the CIA are unlawful combatants because they don't wear uniforms. This seems to be a misapplication of the principle. The idea is the uniform identifies you as a combatant and which allows both sides to minimize civilian casualties. As with most craft the pilot's uniform is not something that can be seen. However the drones are not something that can be mistaken for civilian craft. So if the claim is that the pilots don't wear a uniform at the base they operate the drones from, I think they are on weak to non-existent legal footing.

...the the principle is, civilians don't get to shoot people in war zones. CIA are civilians, end of story.

No, allowing CIA to control the program internally this long is a screw-up, but it's already set to get "fixed." CIA (who is tired of the spotlight) hands over to DoD (who want the program anyhow), this UN fellow gets to say he accomplished something, and the administration gets to say it follows the rule of law.

As I said elsewhere, it's a win for all four parties, and nothing of substance changes.

...military made any kind of strike on the U.S. For that matter, my parents got really angry at the Japanese when they attacked Pearl Harbor. So whether the attack was by a drone or a uniformed pilot, if it was a strike on the US, I would be highly pissed off.

All it really takes to figure that one out is to imagine Pakistani predator drones flying around your home town.

see above.

it is the closed nature of the CIA he has a problem with.

for ordering and/or approving the strikes? If the strikes continue will it open him to such a label?

x(

ETA: K&R

:sarcasm: