• NOVEMBER 8, 2009
ARGUMENT PRINT  |   TEXT SIZE        |  EMAIL  |  SINGLE PAGE

Do Targeted Killings Work?

Drone strikes are far from perfect -- but they're also far better than nothing.

BY DANIEL BYMAN | JULY 14, 2009

Killing terrorist leaders is difficult, is often ineffective, and can easily backfire. Yet it is one of the United States' few options for managing the threat posed by al Qaeda from its base in tribal Pakistan. By some accounts, U.S. drone activity in Pakistan has killed dozens of lower-ranking and at least 10 mid- and high-ranking leaders from al Qaeda and the Taliban.

COMMENTS (1) SHARE:
Digg
 
Facebook
 
Reddit
 
Bookmark and Share More...

Critics correctly find many problems with this program, most of all the number of civilian casualties the strikes have incurred. Sourcing on civilian deaths is weak and the numbers are often exaggerated, but more than 600 civilians are likely to have died from the attacks. That number suggests that for every militant killed, 10 or so civilians also died.

To reduce casualties, superb intelligence is necessary. Operators must know not only where the terrorists are, but also who is with them and who might be within the blast radius. This level of surveillance may often be lacking, and terrorists' deliberate use of children and other civilians as shields make civilian deaths even more likely.

Beyond the humanitarian tragedy incurred, civilian deaths create dangerous political problems. Pakistan's new democratic government is already unpopular for its corruption, favoritism, and poor governance. U.S. strikes that take a civilian toll are a further blow to its legitimacy -- and to U.S. efforts to build goodwill there. As counterterrorism expert David Kilcullen put it, "When we intervene in people's countries to chase small cells of bad guys, we end up alienating the whole country and turning them against us."

And even when they work, killings are a poor second to arrests. Dead men tell no tales and thus are no help in anticipating the next attack or informing us about broader terrorist activities. So in any country with a functioning government, it is better to work with that government to seize the terrorist than to kill him outright. Arresting al Qaeda personnel in remote parts of Pakistan, however, is almost impossible today; the Pakistani government does not control many of the areas where al Qaeda is based, and a raid to seize terrorists there would probably end in the militants escaping and U.S. and allied casualties in the attempt.

12NEXT
Save over 50% when you subscribe to FP.

TARIQ MAHMOOD/AFP/Getty Images

 

Daniel Byman is director of the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University and senior fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. He is author of the forthcoming book, A High Price: The Triumphs and Failures of Israeli Counterterrorism.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE: Facebook|Twitter|Digg
  • Handicapping the Next Palestinian Leader

  • All I Want for Xmas Is an Afghan Strategy

  • Kashmir, the Forgotten Front

  • Does J Street Lead to Jerusalem or Washington?

 (1)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

JH

1:46 AM ET

July 15, 2009

Those who harbour terrorists are terrorists too

I keep on reading this in different articles that the drone attacks in tribal Pakistan have killed only 13 or so Al-Qaida members and more than 600 civilians, this article says about 60 (1:10) militants have been killed along with 600 civilians so far, but how could u say that all those 600 were innocent civilians.
Providing safe passage and hiding places to these terrorists is terrorism too. Why is then there a dominant opinion that the hideouts always contain a few high value Al-Qaida terrorists surrounded by innocent civilians who in my opinion are facilitators.
Is it possible that a high value Al-Qaida terrorist will move around with out sufficient men cover?
In most cases families of those who harbor these terrorists get killed, but then it is a choice that the terrorist made. In most cases people take such risks for money. There is no doubt that civilian casualties emanate out of such operations but statistics should be right and more logical. 10% and 50 or 60% are miles apart.
When these terrorist have made our lives insecure and frightful, then they should themselves live with the terror of drones. Those who suffered at the hands of these terrorist have a certain liking for the drones.

 
TODAY | PAST WEEK

MOST
READ

MOST
COMMENTED

  1. Falling Like It's 1989
  2. Planet Slum
  3. Today's Berlin Walls
  4. Oh, the Places He's Been
  5. Hollow Victory
TODAY | PAST WEEK

MOST
READ

MOST
COMMENTED

  1. The Top 10 Craziest Things Ever Said During a U.N. Speech
  2. Nobel Peace Prize Also-Rans
  3. Edward Burtynsky's Oil
  4. Think Again: God
  5. Bolivia's Lithium-Powered Future
TODAY | PAST WEEK

MOST
READ

MOST
COMMENTED

  1. Good Riddance, Abbas
  2. Think Again: God
  3. Nightmare on J Street
  4. Unsettling Questions
  5. Today's Berlin Walls
TODAY | PAST WEEK

MOST
READ

MOST
COMMENTED

  1. Unsettling Questions
  2. Why Are the United States and Israel at the Top of Human Rights Hit Lists?
  3. Think Again: God
  4. Hollow Victory
  5. Good Riddance, Abbas
  • PASSPORT

    It's not a "diplomatic breakthrough" if it doesn't work

    BY JOSHUA KEATING

  • ARGUMENT

    The real reason the revamped EU matters

    BY ANNIE LOWREY

  • DAVID ROTHKOPF

    Obama: the last baby-boomer president?

  • ARGUMENT

    1989 through Russian eyes

    BY NINA KHRUSHCHEVA

  • THE CABLE

    Afghan strategy rollout imminent

    BY JOSH ROGIN

  • SMALL WARS

    Why the Army's most effective vehicle doesn't work in Afghanistan

    BY ROBERT HADDICK

  • STEPHEN WALT

    Is Obama worse than Bush on Israel?

  • MARC LYNCH

    Why Abbas's resignation might not be a disaster



  • 1. Opting Out: Canada Plans Withdrawal from Afghanistan
  • 2. Trade Objections: China Calls New U.S. Anti-dumping Duties “Protectionist”
  • 3. Lowering the Bar: U.N. Delegates Move Ahead on Climate Change Despite Reservations
  • 4. Death of a Deal: Honduras Calls off Political Compromise
 See All Photo Essays
  • Falling Like It's 1989

  • Obama's Globe-Trotting Adventures, One Year in

November/December 2009
  • Feature

    Revolution in a Box

  • Feature

    Plague, by Robin Cook

  • Opening Gambit

    My Plan to Overthrow the Mullahs

  •  See Entire Issue

     Preview Digital Edition

  • An online guide to following today's floor action on health care reform.
  • Advertisement:
  • Why Arby's is so low on the restaurant food chain.
  • Profit Not Satanic, Says Wealthy Banker
  • Presented By:
  • No Goodwill for Hummers
  • Rihanna Breaks Her Silence
  • Rihanna Breaks Her Silence
  • ‘Precious’ and the Pushback

About FP: Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Corporate Programs | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP

Services: Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues

Subscribe to FP | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | RSS Feeds | Contact Us

FP Logo


1899 L Street NW, Suite 550 | Washington, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the Slate Group, a division of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC
All contents ©2009 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC. All rights reserved.