An unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), commonly known as a drone, is an aircraft without a human pilot on board, either controlled by ‘pilots’ from the ground or increasingly, autonomously following a pre-programmed mission. There are dozens of different types of drones, they basically fall into two categories: those that are used for reconnaissance and surveillance purposes and those that are armed with missiles and bombs. . Its flight is controlled either autonomously by computers in the vehicle, or under the remote control of a pilot on the ground or in another vehicle.
There are a wide variety of drone shapes, sizes, configurations, and characteristics. Historically, UAVs were simple remotely piloted aircraft, but autonomous control is increasingly being employed.
They are deployed predominantly for military applications, but also used in a small but growing number of civil applications, such as policing, firefighting, and nonmilitary security work, such as surveillance of pipelines.
The first UAV created was the Pioneer, which helps to identify artillery and boats Since its performance was so exemplary, they began to be used more and more, with new models constantly being introduced. Drones were first used for aerial reconnaissance during the Bosnia and Kosovo campaigns in the 1990s. Initially they were used only for surveillance purposes, as the U.S. government rejected the idea that they could be used for targeted killings. On February 4, 2002, the CIA first used an unmanned Predator drone in a targeted killing. The strike was in Paktia province in Afghanistan, near the city of Khost. The intended target was Osama bin Laden, or at least someone in the CIA had thought so. Donald Rumsfeld later explained, using the passive voice of government: “A decision was made to fire the Hellfire missile. It was fired.” The incident occurred during a brief period when the military, which assisted the CIA’s drone program by providing active service personnel as operators, still acknowledged the program’s existence. Within days of the strike, journalists on the ground were collecting accounts from local Afghans that the dead men were civilians gathering scrap metal. The Pentagon media pool began asking questions, and so the long decade of the drone began.
As of 2008, the United States Air Force employed 5,331 drones, and out of these, the Predators are the most commendable. Unlike other UAVs, the Predator was armed with Hellfire missiles so that it can terminate the target that it locates. This was done after Predators sighted Osama Bin Laden multiple times but could not do anything about it other than send back images. In addition, the Predator is capable of orchestrating attacks by pointing lasers at the targets In addition, some UAVs have become so small that they can be launched from one’s hand and maneuvered through the street. These UAVs, known as Ravens, are especially useful in urban areas such as Iraq.
The use of drones in situations outside recognized theaters of combat further blur the already endangered concept of sovereignty. Clearly, drone activity (of the type taking place in Pakistan) over a country that has not given its permission constitutes a violation of sovereignty. With that said, this is unsurprising given that the American ‘War on Terror,’ like the ‘War on Drugs,’ knows no boundaries. In the meantime, the use of drones will be a constant bone of contention between those states that advocate for strict adherence to nonintervention norms versus those that acknowledge the utility of this weapon in light of global threats to security (“New Warfare: The Implication of Drones”, Andrew Reddie, Washington, DC., Jan 31st, ‘13)
A decade ago, the United States had a virtual monopoly on drones. Not anymore. According to data compiled by the New America Foundation, more than 70 countries now own some type of drone, though just a small number of those nations possess armed drone aircraft. Although only three countries – the US, the UK and Israel – are known to have used armed drones to date, other countries have developed or bought unarmed drones for battlefield surveillance, or are seeking to obtain armed versions. It appears that international law has not kept pace with this technology. The President of the United States, along with the National Security Agency (NSA), CIA and military advisors, asserts a right to authorize the assassination of individuals perceived to be a threat to the US. Some of these assassinations are carried out in countries with which the US is not at war. Consequently, the use of armed drones to carry out killings in these situations is unlawful.
US civilian and military employees regularly target and fire lethal unmanned drone guided missiles at people across the world. Thousands of people have been assassinated. Hundreds of those killed were civilians. Some of those killed were rescuers and mourners. In Pakistan alone, the New America Foundation reports US forces have launched 297 drone strikes killing at least 1800 people, three to four hundred of whom were not even combatants. Other investigative journalists report four to eight hundred civilians killed by US drone strikes in Pakistan.
But without an international framework governing the use of drone attacks, the United States is setting a dangerous precedent for other nations with its aggressive and secretive drone programs in Pakistan and Yemen, which are aimed at suspected members of Al Qaeda and their allies.
Drones have become a major policy tool in U.S. counter-terrorism policy. In at least five countries – Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan, US drones patrol the skies and occasionally are used to launch lethal strikes against suspected terrorists. At the nexus of national, international, and regional concerns, drones appear likely to remain a contested technology for the foreseeable future. Political theorist Hannah Arendt described the history of warfare in the 20th century as the growing incapacity of the army to fulfill its basic function: defending the civilian population .
The three major reasons drones are seen as the future of warfare are: they remove the risk to our soldiers, they make fewer mistakes than other weapons platforms, and technology will continue to improve such that drones become even more precise, efficient, and infallible in the future, thus rendering less precise, efficient and fallible human forms of war obsolete. Drones are thus seen as marking “a step forward in humanitarian technology,” and viewed as “a weapon of choice for future presidents, future administrations, in future conflicts and circumstances of self-defense and vital national security of the United States.
Drones will inevitably be part of the future of warfare insofar as the advantages they provide can be exploited by political leaders. However, their place in the future of armed conflict will be constrained by their disadvantages and limitations. To the extent that drones are subject to tactical limitations, and thus subordinate to other weapons options and tactics that are less discriminate, the impact of their advantages is limited. It is therefore important to see drones part of a wide array of surveillance and military options, not a replacement for these alternatives.
The advantages of drone warfare are immense, from intelligence gathering capabilities to the actual act of waging war. The contributions to the intelligence community and military that UAVs provide are peerless in the amount of data that can be collected by a single unit. According to the L.A. Times, the Federal Aviation Administration is preparing the legal structure for police departments around the country to utilize drones in their work. In addition, the Air Force is currently developing a series of miniature drones designed to mimic birds and flying insects.
Another major issue that will affect the future use of drones is the implications over privacy. Drones have wide civilian application from surveillance for disaster response and scientific research to mundane activities like traffic control and monitoring livestock. Despite a UN Special Committee Review on drones in 2009, and two hearings hosted by the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010 to discuss the moral and legal implications of drones, they have been the weapon of choice in Obama’s “war on Al Qaeda.” It has been creating a kind of fear among the civilians of Afghanistan and Pakistan and this has made the relations with US weaker, nut because of US’s justification and power, the human rights are badly ignored.
Under the Obama administration, the use of drones as weapons has increased dramatically, with serious legal, moral, and philosophical implications. Surveillance drones, which could become weaponized, create concern for our privacy and freedoms when deployed in US airspace. The implication of drones takes a more serious note if countries other than US start using the technological know-how regarding drones or if terrorists start propagating the use of drones to further terrorism.
Drones, in terms of war-fare, have been a technological advancement. The use of drones has been justified by the US in its War Against Terrorism. However, this is not so as the use of drones has only piled the number of dead, while asserting definitively the military power of the US. Civilians of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq and Syria are under a constant threat of losing their lives or livelihoods. Improper use of drones is a serious violation of human rights. The heavy innocent casualties which are a result of use of drones, outweigh the number of terrorists which are actually eliminated by them.
However, castigating the use of drones is not a step in the right direction. Drones, besides being the advent of high technology in war-fare, have helped reduce the death and injuries to personnel. The US has lost thousands of soldiers in its War Against Terrorism. The use of drones for surveillance or attacks on dangerous terrorists helps save multitude of soldiers who would have perished.
Wherever drones have been deployed, military issues have become simpler and less gruesome. But the question remains whether this technological advancement brings with it the message of peace and human welfare, or will it just become another Weapon of Mass destruction in the days to come?
