Micah Zenko

Politics, Power, and Preventive Action

Zenko covers the U.S. national security debate and offers insight on developments in international security and conflict prevention.

Print Print Email Email Share Share Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close

loading...

Obama’s Low Bar for Drones Transparency

by Micah Zenko
May 29, 2013

Obama Counterterror Speech at National Defense University U.S. President Barack Obama listens to an audience member interrupting his speech on the administration's counterterrorism and drone strike policies at the National Defense University on May 23, 2013 (Reuters/Courtesy Downing).

I had a column published at Foreign Policy today that analyzes the divergence between what President Obama said about drone strikes in his counterterrorism speech last week, and what his senior aides selectively leaked to journalists. Subsequently, many columnists and journalists have mistakenly characterized Obama’s speech as placing tight restrictions on who can be targeted with drone strikes. Others listened to the speech and believed, as National Public Radio stated: “Obama Pledges To Be More Transparent About Drone Program.”

The actual speech neither presented new restrictions, nor offered much in the way of transparency. The president highlighted his decision to authorize attorney general Eric Holder to provide a letter to the senate judiciary committee that acknowledges that four U.S. citizens died in drone strikes, three of whom were not the intended target. Given that all but one of the citizen’s names was reported in the press, this was an example of belated transparency through the acknowledgment of already public information.

Unfortunately, this low bar for transparency about drone strikes is becoming the norm for the Obama administration. Two weeks ago, the Senate Armed Services Committee invited four Pentagon officials to testify at a hearing, “The Law of Armed Conflict, and the Use of Military Force, and the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.” Although the media did not report it, the Pentagon’s joint statement for the record contained this remarkable passage:

We have also made significant efforts to increase transparency regarding whom the U.S. military targets in the current conflict…Last year, for example, we declassified information about the U.S. military’s counterterrorism activities in Yemen and Somalia in a June 2012 War Powers report to Congress. This type of transparency helps preserve public confidence, dispel misconceptions that the U.S. military targets low-level terrorists who pose no threat to the United States, and address questions raised by our allies and partners abroad.

In March, the former chief Pentagon lawyer Jeh Johnson admitted that agreeing to even that basic of language required “a long and difficult deliberative process to get there.” So what far-reaching and specific revelations were contained in the June 2012 War Powers report?

In a limited number of cases, the U.S. military has taken direct action in Somalia against members of al-Qa’ida…engaged in efforts to carry out terrorist attacks against the United States and our interests.

The U.S. military has also been working closely with the Yemeni government to operationally dismantle and ultimately eliminate the terrorist threat posed by al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP)…Our joint efforts have resulted in direct action against a limited number of AQAP operatives and senior leaders in that country who posed a terrorist threat to the United States and our interests.

That’s all. Here again, the White House acknowledged (albeit with no specificity) to Congress what was public information, which the Pentagon touted as a “type of transparency.” Nothing contained in the White House War Powers report to Congress preserved public confidence, dispelled any misconceptions, or certainly addressed the many problems that U.S. allies and partners have with America’s interpretation of the scope of who can be lawfully killed by drone strikes. The White House communications strategy of repeating over and over again that it is committed to greater transparency and public debate regarding targeted killings does not make it so.

Post a Comment 2 Comments

  • Posted by Peter Duveen

    My reading of Obama’s speech is that Obama committed his administration to summary justice. There will be no judicial review for the accused before drone strikes are carried out. We will not be able to check the asssertions of the Obama administration regarding those targeted by drone strikes.

  • Posted by Bill Bledsoe

    Obama murdered 6 Americans with drones. It’s time to impeach Obama for the high crime of murder. Obama murdering Americans is no different than Hitler murdering Jews.

    Obama admitted he gave the orders. Obama said, “And as president, I would have been derelict in my duty had I not authorized the strike that took him out.”

    Obama authorized the strikes that “took out:”
    26 year old Marine Staff Sergeant Jeremy Smith;
    23 year old Navy Hospitalman Benjamin D. Rast;
    16 year old Abdulrahman Anwar al-Awlaki from Denver, Colorado;
    25 year old Samir Khan from North Carolina and New York City;
    20 year old Jude Kenan Mohammad from Florida and North Carolina;
    40 year old Anwar Al-Awlaki from New Mexico and Colorado;

    Sergeant Smith’s father viewed the video of his son’s murder and was stunned. he said, “You couldn’t even tell they were human beings, just blobs.”

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required