Americans can sleep easier now that the US military has wiped out 150
more “terrorists.” US airstrikes over Somalia targeted al-Shabab
militants, who were, according to Pentagon spokesperson Captain Jeff Davis,
planning “offensive operations.” Davis neglected to elaborate
on what “offensive operations” were planned by the group.
He did say that they had been monitoring the camp for a while and
had a “sense” that the “operational phase was about to begin.”
Unsurprisingly Davis failed to elaborate on the details of the “operational
phase” or what it might have looked like. Or how they got their “sense”
to begin with.
Interestingly, Davis also said that “their removal will degrade al-Shabab’s
ability to meet the group’s objectives in Somalia.”
When it comes to the empirical data on this claim, I’m skeptical. Did
the invasion of Iraq deter terrorists? How about the so-called “targeted”
strikes against alleged terrorists in Yemen, Pakistan and now Somalia? Has
the response of terrorist or militant groups to US airstrikes in the last
decade given us good reason to think that more bombing will significantly
hinder their abilities?
More often, it seems like these airstrikes merely reinvigorate terrorist
groups and encourage others to join them. These forms of blowback hinge on
the “collateral damage” to civilians who have nothing to do with
the conflict in question. After all when these innocent individuals lose their
homes, lose their families, or lose their land, what do you think they’ll
do? Who does Davis think they’ll blame?
Even if we agree with the numbers Davis gives us (and we have good
historical reasons not to), there are still many aspects to question.
Let’s assume that the drone strike was “morally good”. It
did what it was supposed to: it eliminated the correct targets with absolutely
no “collateral damage” on persons or property. This is a big assumption,
but let’s grant it for sake of argument.
There remain other moral issues. For one, the consistent othering
of people in foreign lands that must occur so that their deaths are more palatable
to the American public. This usually involves perpetuating a harmful bias
economist Bryan Caplan called, “anti-foreign
bias.” Anti-foreign bias in the context of drone bombs or war more
broadly helps further the ability to the US government to bomb whomever they
suspect is a terrorist, especially if they are outside the US.
And to top it off the government then gets to do so without any due
process or any oversight. All of these things set dangerous precedent for the
future of US wars. The main problem here is summed up by journalist Glenn Greenwald
in the headline of his recent article: Nobody
Knows…