The Drone Wars

| Mon Feb. 8, 2010 1:48 PM PST

Almost every day, reports come back from the CIA’s "secret" battlefield in the Pakistani tribal borderlands. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles—that is, pilot-less drones—shoot missiles (18 of them in a single attack on a tiny village last week) or drop bombs and then the news comes in: a certain number of al-Qaeda or Taliban leaders or suspected Arab or Uzbek or Afghan "militants" have died. The numbers are often remarkably precise. Sometimes they are attributed to U.S. sources, sometimes to the Pakistanis; sometimes, it’s hard to tell where the information comes from. In the Pakistani press, on the other hand, the numbers that come back are usually of civilian dead. They, too, tend to be precise.

Don’t let that precision fool you. Here’s the reality: There are no reporters on the ground and none of these figures can be taken as accurate. Let’s just consider the CIA side of things. Any information that comes from American sources (i.e. the CIA) has to be looked at with great wariness. As a start, the CIA’s history is one of deception. There’s no reason to take anything its sources say at face value. They will report just what they think it’s in their interest to report—and the ongoing "success" of their drone strikes is distinctly in their interest. 

Then, there’s history. In the present drone wars, as in the CIA’s bloody Phoenix Program in the Vietnam era, the Agency’s operatives, working in distinctly alien terrain, must rely on local sources (or possibly official Pakistani ones) for targeting intelligence. In Vietnam in the 1960s, the Agency’s Phoenix Program—reportedly responsible for the assassination of 20,000 Vietnamese—became, according to historian Marilyn Young, "an extortionist’s paradise, with payoffs as available for denunciation as for protection." Once again, the CIA is reportedly passing out bags of money and anyone on the ground with a grudge, or the desire to eliminate an enemy, or simply the desire to make some of that money can undoubtedly feed information into the system, watch the drones do their damnedest, and then report back that more "terrorists" are dead. Just assume that at least some of those "militants" dying in Pakistan, and possibly many of them, aren’t who the CIA hopes they are.

Think of it as a foolproof situation, with an emphasis on the "fool." And then keep in mind that, in December, the CIA’s local brain trust, undoubtedly the same people who were leaking precise news of "successes" in Pakistan, mistook a jihadist double agent from Jordan for an agent of theirs, gathered at an Agency base in Khost, Afghanistan, and let him wipe them out with a suicide bomb. Seven CIA operatives died, including the base chief. This should give us a grim clue as to the accuracy of the CIA’s insights into what’s happening on the ground in Pakistan, or into the real effects of their 24/7 robotic assassination program. 

But there’s a deeper, more dangerous level of deception in Washington’s widening war in the region: self-deception. The CIA drone program, which the Agency’s Director Leon Panetta has called "the only game in town" when it comes to dismantling al-Qaeda, is just symptomatic of such self-deception. While the CIA and the U.S. military have been expending enormous effort studying the Afghan and Pakistani situations and consulting experts, and while the White House has conducted an extensive series of seminars-cum-policy-debates on both countries, you can count on one thing: none of them have spent significant time studying or thinking about us. 

As a result, the seeming cleanliness and effectiveness of the drone-war solution undoubtedly only reinforces a sense in Washington that the world’s last great military power can still control this war—that it can organize, order, prod, wheedle, and bribe both the Afghans and Pakistanis into doing what’s best, and if that doesn’t work, simply continue raining down the missiles and bombs. Beware Washington’s deep-seated belief that it controls events; that it is, however precariously, in the saddle; that, as Afghan War commander General Stanley McChrystal recently put it, there is a "corner" to "turn" out there, even if we haven’t quite turned it yet. 

In fact, Washington is not in the saddle and that corner, if there, if turned, will have its own unpleasant surprises. Washington is, in this sense, as oblivious as those CIA operatives were as they waited for "their" Jordanian agent to give them supposedly vital information on the al-Qaeda leadership in the Pakistani tribal areas. Like their drones, the Americans in charge of this war are desperately far from the ground, and they don’t even seem to know it.

It’s time for Washington to examine not what we know about them, but what we don’t know about ourselves.

Read more about drone attacks in Pratap Chatterjee's "Destabilizing Pakistan."

Advertisement

Advertisement

Tom Engelhardt runs the Nation Institute's Tomdispatch.com. He is the author of The End of Victory Culture and coeditor of History Wars, the Enola Gay and Other Battles for the American Past.

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.

Comments

Right

Right- how dare the CIA and other American patriots try to kill our enemies!

If only the left had as much sympathy for the innocent victims of Islamic fanatics including American servicemen then it might have some credibility.

And how do we know they were

And how do we know they were our enemies? Well, we killed them, didn't we? The fact of the mater is, idiotic cowards like you only feel safe when somebody, anybody is getting killed or tortured for posing a potentially real infinitesimal threat to them. It doesn't matter if the threat is imaginary; as long as people are being tortured and killed, there is plenty of imaginary security to keep the idiotic cowards feeling secure enough to function in the face of the imaginary threat. Go hide behind your mommy's skirts, piss-puddle.

Not only that, but he/she

Not only that, but he/she doesn't seem to have the sense that calling them enemies doesn't alter the fact that killing innocents (sort of like on 9/11) quite likely has just the opposite effect as killing actual enemies would. Killing innocents by the scores does absolutely nothing to make us any safer. But it probably does inflame some of the friends and relatives of the victims to want to cause us harm (much the same as 9/11 inflamed a murderous anger here).

Sitting in air-conditioned

Sitting in air-conditioned comfort, cans of Coke and 7-Up within reach as they watched their screens, the ground controllers gave the order to strike under the cover of darkness. There had been no declaration of war. No advance warning, nothing, in fact, that would have alerted the “enemy” to the sudden, unprecedented bombing raids. The secret computer-guided strikes were authorized by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, just weeks after a new American president entered the Oval Office. They represented an effort to wipe out the enemy’s central headquarters whose location intelligence experts claimed to have pinpointed just across the border from the war-torn land where tens of thousands of American troops were fighting daily.

The Drone Wars

The number thirty something is not all that accurate, but the Judas 30 is.

Cognitive dissonnance.

There is something sinister about a nation that launches cruise missles from far out at sea against nations with no navy, drops bombs from 30000 feet and launches drone attacks from 10000 miles away against nations with no air force, and then calls these targeted enemies cowards because when they fight back they are not in uniforms.

So where is the evidence that

the civilian reports are inaccurate? It seems the author felt it necessary to paint them as equally unreliable to the words of the professional, pathological liars put forward by the CIA and DOD, but there is no reason to doubt their essential accuracy.

Poppies

If the Afgan farmers raised food crops instead of poppies for the drug war lords over there, there would be no war, no drones, no killing of innocent people. It 's all about money and greed of a few__ as usual.

Then of course our (manned) aricraft strikes killed at least "two" innocent people during our Vietnam "conflict" to supress the spread of Communism to all of SE Asia. Ha haha.

MacNamarra was an over educated idiot and we still have lots more of them in DC now. BTW, Mac was a Democrat. Shotgun Dick and his under educated sidekick Bush Jr are Republicans. Being either a "Lefty" or a "Righty" is not a requirement for stupidity.

Post new comment

Alternately, you may login to or register an account
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback

We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.

Photo Essays

The chaos and humanity of war.
What becomes of Janesville, Wisconsin, now that GM's left town?
The other side of Gitmo.
American Holidays