• NOVEMBER 21, 2009
FEATURE PRINT  |   TEXT SIZE        |  EMAIL  |  SINGLE PAGE

Assassination: A Brief History

When we go to war, what happens when we make our enemies faceless?

BY GEORGE JONAS | JULY 20, 2009

Opponents couldn't make political hay out of former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney's withholding (if he did) from congressional scrutiny secret CIA programs to assassinate high-ranking al Qaeda operatives, if people had no qualms about targeted killing. But they do. Governments can bomb faceless troops of enemy conscripts with impunity, but are questioned closely about bombing photographable individuals. Numbers numb; identity humanizes. That's the general rule.

COMMENTS (3) SHARE:
Digg
 
Facebook
 
Reddit
 
Bookmark and Share More...

Countries put their weaponry for random killing on ceremonial display, but are evasive about their assets and capabilities for targeted killing. Some reticence makes sense -- stealth is an operational requirement for such missions -- but much of the evasiveness is due to moral reservations. The media will let an administration get away with a sweeping military operation against anonymous combatants, even when it endangers noncombatants, but will put governments in the hot seat over the assassination of a committed foe -- say, a terrorist -- even when there's little risk of collateral damage.

Cheney didn't invent targeted killing any more than Al Gore invented the Internet. Rulers have been known to send assassins after specific individuals since antiquity, though official taste for what the KGB used to call "wet business" varied. Citizens assumed that their governments engaged in clandestine violence -- fictional figures like 007 with "a license to kill" were staple items in popular literature -- but it wasn't until the collapse of the Soviet empire in 1991 that some of its former member states acknowledged past participation in actions of this type.

Some allied democracies, notably Israel, have been known to practice extrajudicial measures such as cross-border abduction (Adolf Eichmann in 1960) and hostage-rescue (Entebbe in 1976). Following the massacre of 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics, the retaliatory killing of individuals designated as terrorists has also been commonly associated with Israel, though not formally acknowledged. Acknowledgment hardly mattered, though, after several Israeli agents were captured and tried for mistakenly killing an Arab waiter in Lillehammer, Norway, in 1973.

Things changed in the 1990s. Life started imitating fiction quite openly, and by the end of the 20th century the targeted assassination of prominent terrorists had become regular television fare. Hamas's "spiritual" leader, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, died on the evening news, but Israel was by no means the only state to counter terrorism in front of the cameras. Al Qaeda lieutenants in Afghanistan were blown up in prime time by U.S. Predator missiles (making the accusation that Cheney had kept targeted killings from Congress something of a joke). The hush-hush missions of James Bond were turning into public spectacles.

123NEXT
Save over 50% when you subscribe to FP.

AFP/Getty Images

 

George Jonas is author of Vengeance: The True Story of an Israeli Counter-Terrorist Team, which was adapted for the film Munich.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE: Facebook|Twitter|Digg
  • The Al Qaeda Diaries

  • Boring Summits Are Better for Everyone

  • D.C.'s New Game: Who's Paying Your Pundit?

  • Lowering the Bar: The ABA's Ties to Despots

 (3)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

SDECATUR

4:52 PM ET

July 21, 2009

Sweeping Generalizations

Is there a quota for sweeping generalizations in Foreign Policy articles? "Sophomoric" indeed

 

INJUNTROUBLE

7:06 PM ET

July 21, 2009

Targeting Al Quida Leaders is not an problem at all

Actually nobody in America has qualms about targeting high-ranking al Qaeda operatives.

The problem in this case is that the CIA (on Cheney's orders) did not inform Congress. But there may be worse things to still come out - it seems the CIA is still lying to Congress even now (and maybe even lying to Panetta) - the covert program was not in some planning state as claimed, but a fully operational program with several successful 'hits'. There is also some reliable information that it not only targeted known terrorists, but also unfriendly politicians as well as journalists.

If the DCI is not fully aware of the details of this program, I doubt if we ever will be.

 

LAZLO JAMF

8:58 PM ET

July 21, 2009

sweeping generalizations

The instruments described above are sweeping generalizations. Policy is constructed with sweeping generalizations. From the point of view of a weapon, whether held by friend or foe, everybody is a sweeping generalization. This article's candor and lack of coded terminology is appreciated.

 
TODAY | PAST WEEK

MOST
READ

MOST
COMMENTED

  1. Karzai's Cronies
  2. Planet Slum
  3. The Al Qaeda Diaries
  4. The Terrorists Among Us
  5. The Real Shock of Fort Hood
TODAY | PAST WEEK

MOST
READ

MOST
COMMENTED

  1. Edward Burtynsky's Oil
  2. Think Again: God
  3. Bolivia's Lithium-Powered Future
  4. Planet Slum
  5. Plague: A New Thriller of the Coming Pandemic
TODAY | PAST WEEK

MOST
READ

MOST
COMMENTED

  1. The Al Qaeda Diaries
  2. Zardari in the Crosshairs
  3. The Real Shock of Fort Hood
  4. The Terrorists Among Us
  5. This Week at War: Heading for a Bad Breakup
TODAY | PAST WEEK

MOST
READ

MOST
COMMENTED

  1. The President, the Professor, and the Wide Receiver
  2. The Real Shock of Fort Hood
  3. Is There a Palin Doctrine?
  4. The Only Hope Left?
  5. The Terrorists Among Us
  • NET EFFECT

    Why are people creating Facebook profiles for Holocaust victims?

    BY EVGENY MOROZOV

  • PASSPORT

    North Africa's escalating soccer war

    BY JOSHUA KEATING

  • ARGUMENT

    How the Chinese media covered Obama's visit

    BY WILLIAM MOSS

  • SMALL WARS

    The U.S. and Pakistan are heading for a bad breakup

    BY ROBERT HADDICK

  • DANIEL DREZNER

    Time's not-so-shocking Obamaland expose

  • BEST DEFENSE

    What would George Marshall think of today's generals?

    BY THOMAS E. RICKS

  • SHADOW GOVT.

    What does containing North Korea actually mean?

    BY JAMIE FLY

  • THE CABLE

    How the Chinese government censored Obama's visit

    BY JOSH ROGIN



  • 1. Aligning on Afghanistan? President Obama and PM Brown Turn Focus on Exit Strategy
  • 2. R.I.P.: Russia to Continue Ban on the Death Penalty
  • 3. All for One: Jailed Fatah Leader Implores Palestinian Unity
  • 4. Global Warming Time Out: Stagnating Temperatures Baffle Climate Experts
 See All Photo Essays
  • Planet slum: From Nairobi to Caracas, Mumbai, and Jakarta

  • Falling Like It's 1989

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

  • Made in China—and sold there, too.
  • Why Sarah Palin is unlikely to be the future of the Republican Party.
  • What to drink on Thanksgiving: Napa cabernet.
  • Geithner Is Not Going Anywhere
  • GM Customers Give Back
  • Ron Paul Wins Lifelong Fight, Now May Be Forced To Vote Against Everything He Believes
  • What Would the Pilgrims Say About Tofu?
  • What Would the Pilgrims Say About Tofu?
  • What Kobe, LeBron and Dwyane Owe Spencer Haywood

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.