The Obama Doctrine

How the president's drone war is backfiring.

BY DAVID ROHDE | MARCH/APRIL 2012

Obama and other administration officials insist the drones are used rarely and kill few civilians. In a rare public comment on the program, the president defended the strikes in late January. "I want to make sure the people understand, actually, drones have not caused a huge number of civilian casualties," Obama said. "For the most part, they have been very precise precision strikes against al Qaeda and their affiliates. And we are very careful in terms of how it's been applied."

But from Pakistan to Yemen to post-American Iraq, drones often spark deep resentment where they operate. When they do attack, they kill as brutally as any weapon of war. The administration's practice of classifying the strikes as secret only exacerbates local anger and suspicion. Under Obama, drone strikes have become too frequent, too unilateral, and too much associated with the heavy-handed use of American power.

In 2008, I saw this firsthand. Two Afghan colleagues and I were kidnapped by the Taliban and held captive in the tribal areas of Pakistan for seven months. From the ground, drones are terrifying weapons that can be heard circling overhead for hours at a time. They are a potent, unnerving symbol of unchecked American power. At the same time, they were clearly effective, killing foreign bomb-makers and preventing Taliban fighters from gathering in large groups. The experience left me convinced that drone strikes should be carried out -- but very selectively.

In the January interview, Obama insisted drone strikes were used only surgically. "It is important for everybody to understand," he said, "that this thing is kept on a very tight leash."

Drones, though, are in no way surgical.

IN INTERVIEWS, CURRENT AND FORMER Obama administration officials told me the president and his senior aides had been eager from the outset to differentiate their approach in Pakistan and Afghanistan from Bush's. Unlike in Iraq, where Democrats thought the Bush administration had been too aggressive, they thought the Bush White House had not been assertive enough with Afghan and Pakistani leaders. So the new administration adopted a unilateral, get-tough approach in South Asia that would eventually spread elsewhere. As candidate Obama vowed in a 2007 speech, referring to Pakistan's president at the time, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."

In his first year in office, Obama approved two large troop surges in Afghanistan and a vast expansion of the number of CIA operatives in Pakistan. The CIA was also given more leeway in carrying out drone strikes in the country's ungoverned tribal areas, where foreign and local militants plot attacks for Afghanistan, Pakistan, and beyond.

Ethan Miller/Getty Images; Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

 

David Rohde, a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner and former reporter for the New York Times, is a foreign affairs columnist for Reuters and the Atlantic.

ALANCHRISTOPHER

3:00 PM ET

February 27, 2012

Drone Wars

The temptation for the US government to assassinate is strong. Fortunately, it releases Americans from any moral or legal requirements to inform the Obama regime of any plans to assassinate the president, vice president, cabinet members, national security council members, senators, or congressmen. Simply avoid the location of the proposed assassination and continue with life. Leaders can be replaced, and the removal of the regime's murderers will not inconvenience the US because a chain of command exists for the replacement of the murdering leaders who die at the hands of other killers. In short, let the killers kill each other.

The other advantage is that it continues to destroy US computers, digital cameras, cell phones, and fertilizer, the basic components of smart munitions. It burns billions of gallons of US aviation fuel. It wastes billions of US man hours, 168 people per Predator and 180 people per Reaper with 7,500 drones, in unproductive work each year. China makes the products and sells them for profit. China uses the fuel to move passengers and cargo for profit. Russia sells the fuel for profit. China and Russia use their man hours to produce profit. While the US destroys its economy, the Communist Party of the People's Republic of China and the KGB in Russia help their national economies to grow and thrive so their countries can become the leaders of the world.

 

MW140496

11:08 PM ET

February 28, 2012

On profit...

Correct: the Russians use their man hours to produce profit...

More correct: The Chinese use their man-hours to produce GROWTH. They spend their profit immediately on anything and everything which might produce growth. Thus, they do nothing for profit and everything for GDP.

 

TTAERUM

8:03 PM ET

February 27, 2012

happy warrior...

It's difficult to draw any conclusion other than the fact our President enjoys the hunt. There certainly haven't been any signs of regret, no mia copa for those unfortunates whose only crime was to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, no suggestions about when it will end or even if it ought to end. Like Air Force One, it's something that comes with the job. It has less emotional attachment for the White House than a birdie in a golf game. It's no small wonder that the natives are restless.

 

MARTINJOHN01

11:57 AM ET

March 31, 2012

Perfect Orders

This was precisely why President Obama decided to hit with a bullet rather than a missile: you can’t be sure you’ve killed the most wanted man in the world when all you’ve got to show for it is a giant crater in the ground. addiction treatment center

 

JOHN KANTOR

2:13 PM ET

February 29, 2012

The real enemies....

The only problem with Obama's "doctrine" is that he's doing it instead of using conventional means rather than as an adjunct to them.

He's doing it because it leads to less bad publicity - but just like all pathetic Liberals, you're only problem with it is that it isn't quiet enough. There's always somebody left around when a drone strikes.

But your crocodile tears don't mean you care about the Afghans, the Pakistanis, or your neighbor next door. You didn't care about them before 9/11 and you won't care about them when every foreign soldier is gone. Just like you didn't care about the South Vietnamese, or the Cambodians, or the Bosnians, or anyone else. If you did you'd be out fighting - not babbling pathetic isolationist propaganda.

Terrorists and despots aren't the enemy. They are just opportunists. They only have power because of parasites like you. And one day, someone is going to realize that the real enemies aren't hiding in caves. They're right here where they are a lot easy to get to.

 

REALREALIST

4:57 PM ET

February 29, 2012

His doctrine? you mean muslim appeasement?

oh yes, sacrifice your allies to appease your enemies...

thats one helluva doctrine!

 

LODYANN

7:31 PM ET

March 27, 2012

great paying online jobs $50/hour

my co-worker's sister made $12867 the prior week. she is making cash on the computer and moved in a $507700 condo. All she did was get fortunate and put to work the directions laid out on this website
MakeCash10.com

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||