The PJRC

The Peace Exchange Bulletin
Search Site
Get Involved
This form does not yet contain any fields.
    Support the PJRC

    Support the PJRC for continued original analysis on ending the wars, funding domestic priorities and preserving civil liberties.

    Make a contribution to the PJRC now!

    Make a tax-deductible donation of $25 or more and receive an autographed copy of Tom Hayden's newest book!

    Inspiring Participatory Democracy: Student Movements from Port Huron to Today

    Conferences & Events

    Tom Hayden speaks in Port Huron, MI, in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Port Huron Statement.

    4/12 - Los Angeles Times Festival of Books

    Invite Tom Hayden to speak in your town!

    Follow Tom

                    

    Contact Us
    This form does not yet contain any fields.
      Wednesday
      May222013

      The Silence of the Drones

      Drone operators during an MQ-9 Reaper training mission from a control station at Holloman Air Force Base. (Photo: Michael Shoemaker)Without mentioning the widespread protests against US drone warfare, the mainstream media reports a sharp decline in drone attacks recently. Noted several weeks ago by the Peace and Justice Resource Center, the sudden silence of the drones once again received front-page mention by Scott Shane in the May 22 New York Times in the run-up to President Obama’s speech at the National Defense University. 

      Shane explained the drop as perhaps due to “a changing calculation of the long-term costs and benefits of targeted killings,” without mentioning that spreading protests by groups like Code Pink, among others, and the simmering criticisms by public-interest journalists as a “cost” of the previously invisible drone program. Shane, whose continuing coverage of Obama’s secret wars and crackdowns on whistleblowers has “cost” the Obama administration, portrayed the conflict over drones in a top-down, Beltway-based, fashion, ignoring the “cost” of protests wherever administration officials appear. Some in the Obama administration fear the return of angry “ghosts” from past anti-war movements. 

      Shane only mentions “an eroding political consensus in the United States” as one of the factors, while placing emphasis on growing differences within the national security elite over the relative effectiveness of the drone strategy. 

      To the extent that the drone policy has a geo-political dimension, it may be necessary for the Obama administration to still or reduce the attacks in Pakistan in exchange for progress on a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan. It is difficult to imagine the Taliban calling off its spring offensive while US drones are attacking their sanctuaries in Pakistan. 

      US drone attacks on Pakistan climbed from 53 in 2009, Obama’s first year in office, to a high of 117 in 2010, and dropped in subsequent years to 64, 46, and 13 so far in 2013. 

      It is vital to distinguish between ending drone warfare and de-escalating or adopting a de facto cessation, either of which could lead to diplomatic progress while containing the growth of protest at home.

      PrintView Printer Friendly Version

      EmailEmail Article to Friend